schools in helmand province and elsewhere, i think you'll see very good progress but i'll write to him with exact details. >> the british house of commons from earlier today. the u.s. house returns in about an hour from their fourth of july holiday with legislative business at 2:00 p.m. eastern and votes after 6:30. the main work in the house this week will be on defense spending for fiscal 2012. also, expected today, the u.s. commitment to a moshted settlement of the -- of a negotiated settlement of the israeli-pakistan commitment. an overhaul of the flood insurance program. live house coverage here at 2:00 here on c-span. >> this weekend on book tv on c-span2 is everything you know about the yoke corral wrong? jeff given tells a different story about wyatt erp and the gang. charles hill looks at the long war of islamism against the

international state system. also in manana forever, jose castaneda talks about the problems facing our southern neighbor. and sign up for booktv alert, weekend schedules in your inbox. >> earlier today the number two command for the after gap stan said president obama's troop withdrawal plan doesn't pose significant risk to the counterinsurgency strategy. lieutenant counselor david rodriguez says he doesn't expect violence in afghanistan to start decreasing until next year. from the pentagon earlier today, this is 45 minutes. >> general rodriguez, it's counselor dave lapin at the pentagon. if you're ready to go, i'll introduce you and we'll get started. >> ok, dave, go ahead, thanks. >> thank you. good morning to those here, good evening in afghanistan. i'd like to welcome pack to the

pentagon briefing room, army lieutenant general david rodriguez. he's commander of the international security assistance force joint command, also known as i.j.c. and also the deputy commander of the united states forces afghanistan. general rodriguez's current tour began in june, 2009, he became the first commander of the i.j.c. in october of that year. prior to that, general rodriguez was commander of regional command east for 15 months from january, 2007 to april, 2008. next week after two straight years in command and more than 40 months in after gap stan over the past 4 1/2 year, general rodriguez is ski wruled to change command and return stateside to have u.s. army forces command. the general most recently joined us here in person last february and we're very grate to feel see him this morning

via satellite for an update on operations before he changes command. with that, general, i'll return it to you. >> good morning, dave. thank you for that introduction. as most of you know, i'll be returning home to the united states later this month. my friend, lieutenant general scaparotti, will be taking my place as commander of the joint command. we have done this several times before, four to be exact, and he followed me, of courses to the 82nd as well as regional command east. i keep feeling story for him. he keeps getting stuck with me. but in all seriousness, he's the right guy for the job at the right time. we began a new approach in the sum over 2009. it's involved but it's important that we briefly review the basis of the plan. i'll give you an overview of the approach and then tell you where i think we stand with regard to achieving our

objectives as we prepare for some troops to return home in the future. and i'll goif you an idea where i believe we are headed. our objectives remain the same to deny al qaeda sanctuary and prevent re-- insurgents from retaking afghanistan. we'll continue to destroy or degrade the infrastructure, build afghan security forces strong enough to lead in providing security for the country and ultimately mobilize the people to stand up against their enemies. we are meeting our objectives because we continue to execute an operational plan that works. first, our plan focuses us on key areas throughout the country. population centers, commerce nodes and routes, because a majority of the population lives in less than a third of the country. now we are fighting a rural insurgency. it lies in the villages and the first line of assistance for the villagers is the district government. secondly, it effectively

prioritizes and sequence house we execute security, governance, and development. and third, it grounds us in what i call a trinity of good governance, capable security force, and the people. when all three work together, we know afghans can arrive at viable local solutions. this approach has allowed us to effectively implement the right plan. as a result, the coalition now has a plan, progress is indisputable. we have focused our efforts, we have degraded the insurgency, built the afghan security forces and mobilized many of the afghan people against those who threaten their way of life. let me talk a little bit about what we have accomplished. the growth and development of the afghan security forces is on the right path. each day, they are taking on greater responsibility and helping prevent spectacular attacks across the country. for example, the recent incident in kabul where the afghan national security forces successfully prevented numerous suicide bombers from killing

hundreds of civilians in the intercontinental hotel. with regard to sequencing and prioritizing our efforts, we have aligned with our civilian partners. we are no longer clearing areas again and again and again. now in advance of clearing the area, we create the conditions for government and development to quickly follow after security is established. so we spend the bulk of our military effort on degrading or destroying insurgent infrastructure and ensure that the planning for local security and good governance begins early enough to be implemented as soon as the security conditions allow. we have made great progress with our civilian counterparts both in the afghan government and the international community to coordinate these efforts. evidence of our progress is clear. this winter, we took the fight to the insurgents in key areas across afghanistan and helped our afghan partners increase their effectiveness at the same time. we targeted insurgent

leadership, command and control, the support bases and their infiltration routes. together we have captured or killed over 1,000 insurgents in the last six months. approximately 250% more than in the same period last year. and together this spring, we have seen a 300% increase in the number of caches found compared to the same number last year. many of these finds have been the result of the afghan security forces and tips from the local people. we've begun the process of working ourselves out of a job. meaning, we will hand over the lead to the afghans gradually over time and it's going to begin now. we intend to become what our afghan partners call a sixth finger. not particularly useful anymore. later this month, we'll be transitioning the lead in seven locations. kabul province, he will munn, and others. as we move forward with the plan, the transition will

continue to be conditions based. in the tougher areas, we will thin out forces and either ship forces to're areas -- to other areas or ship forces home. our afghan partners will rides to the occasion. will we -- we will stay the course with a plan. there's no faster way to dilute our efforts and undo our accomplishments. we will execute the plan the afghans have developed with us. the second traunch of transition should be selected by the afghan government late they are summer. i believe the transition is on track an we can achieve sufficient stability across afghanistan by 2014 with the troops redeploying as scheduled. we made hard-won progress in kandahar, and there have been advances in east, west, and knot, aided by the growth of afghan and coalition forces over the last few years. also growth in government

capacity, which, of course, lags, but we can't to make indisputable progress. even with the drawdown of 33,000 u.s. troops by the end of next summer, there'll be a surge of 70,000 after began national security forces and 350,000 after began national security forces in place to protect the people and continue momentum. over time, the look and feel of the international community's presence in afghanistan will be different. the government of afghanistan will need to balance the responsibilities of providing security, rule of law, essential services and the infrastructure capacity for sustainable economic growth. the coalition -- co-lig's stated objectives are achieveable in afghanistan. as we go forward, we'll continue to apply the same discipline and stay on the campaign trajectory. what's most critical is resupport good afghan leaders and encourage them to build within their ranks and inspire other leaders to join in helping create a hopeful

future. 23 we maintain the momentum, it is indeed possible to achieve what both we and the people of afghanistan desire and deserve. before taking your questions, i want to express my admiration and thanks to all the soldiers, sailor, airmen, marines and civilians and our international and afghan partners. it was a privilege and honor to serve them all. i will treasure the friendships i have made and remember the good friends who have gave -- who gave their lives. now i'll take your questions. >> this is bob burns from a.p. thanks for taking the time to do this today. i have a question for you about this drawdown you mentioned. when will it actually begin specifically? how will it begin? will it include combat units this year? and do you have any misgivings about the pace of the drawdown as announced by the president?

>> thanks, bob. the drawdown will begin this month. as was stated in the president's address and it will include both combat troops and combat support troops as well as combat service support troops. it will be a gradual drawdown and i'm confident that we can draw down those troops through the end of this year and accomplish our mission. next year it will be up to the leaders to see how it goes in the future. >> followup question, general from bob burns. you say it will start this month. could you be more specific? has it already started? will be -- what will happen this month that will signal the beginning of the drawdown? >> yeah, there are two

battalions that will not deploy to replace two battalions that will redeploy this month. that will be the initial return of the surge forces. now as we move forward between now and december, that will be a gradual drawdown of forces and again that -- that will be headquarters and combat service support troops and combat support troops. and there's one other combat unit that will come back that i know of now and the decision on the final drawdown of those 10,000 will be made later this fall between crmbing om-sf. >> can i ask another one? >> on that same point, the two battalions that will be offline next month is that the only

drawdown for the sum her and the rest of it will come later in the year? >> they will continue throughout the summer. it'll be a gradual drawdown throughout the time. i think the next one, big group, will occur still in the summer and then the rest inform fall. >> and it -- >> courtney. >> hi, general rod reges, on the same line of questioning, the other combat unit that's going to come back who is that? is it brigade size? and do you anticipate that the drawdown of the 10,000 this year will be more troops that are coming back and not being replaced but they're still coming back at their normal end of the employment, versus being brought back early? >> the majority of them will come back and not be a

redeployment coming behind them. that's how we'll try to do it. but there will be some that their tour will be curtailed a little bit. the final stable thoofs drawdown will be determined at a later date. >> who is the combat unit that you mentioned that you know of that's going to come back and not be replaced? >> two units, one here in kabul, it's the second of the 134th, and further, a little down in -- later in the summer, at the end of the summer, the 34 marines will come out and not be replaced and there's another one that won't be replaced here, the first of the 141st. >> i've got another one. >> jillian.

>> general. what is the level of violence that you've seen this summer and how does it compare to last summer and are you judging the indisputable progress on violence or is it other factors that create -- leave you -- lead you -- leave you, say, indisputable prodepress? >> well, as far as the violence levels, it's a mixture. some of them are up a little bit in places where we focused our energy, they are down. it is a slight increase overall since last year. and no, that is not the only indicator of progress. the most important indicator of progress is really how the afghan people go about their daily business an participate in their daily lives and participate in their government.

but we look at six factors. we look at the strength of the threat, the strength of the afghan national security forces, the strength of the government, and the strength of the people as they go about their daily business, and we take the combination of those things to include the violence levels, as you said. >> i'm going to take my followup. when do you anticipate, when would you anticipate, the overall violence level would go down? in iraq, it was, you know, by six months into the surge, violence in iraq went down dramatically. here in afghanistan, we are way longer into the surge and the overall level of violence has not gone down. do we think -- is it fair to assume we'll see that go down later this summer? or could it be next year?

>> that remains to be seen. it'll actually probably be next year. what the difference is, of course, is that it's a rural insurgency so what we see happening is the violence is now on the edges of the population center instead of the center and also the -- there is a significant increase in direct fire attacks that are very, very ineffective. that's what we'll see continue as a trend into the future until it starts to decrease sometime into the future. >> general, it's jennifer griffin from fox news. what evidence are you seeing of iranian involvement in the conflict in after depan stan? we've heard reports from senator graham speaking about -- he's recently back from afghan, speaking about irap positioning weapons in afghanistan, but in the past when we asked this question, we heard there have been a few interceptions of weapons but not many. can you point to any change in

iranian involvement? >> it's been pretty consistent, ma'am. that level is just about the normal level of arms and ammunition that crosses borders in this volatile region each year and they do not -- have not increased significantly in the past two years. >> can you quantify how many you're intercepting, you know, at a given time period? >> no, i can't, ma'am. you can get that information from us later, but they said it's not any increase or decrease and it's been pretty consistent for the last several years. >> sir, tom shanker from "the new york times" again. thank you for your time. my question is about the afghan security forces which you cited as a capability, as we sit here

in washington, it's hard to understand if that's a glass half empty or glass half full. the local forces will absorb that but it was kuwait violent. give us your view about that and what it says about the capabilities of local security forces. >> in the intercontinental hotel attack, the afghan security forces responded very, very quickly with the crisis response unit who were the ones who led the way as they cleared the floors of the intercontinental hotel and basically put the enemy where what they kid was ran through the hotel, up to the top of the hotel, which is where the remaining enemy was killed by the combined force. and they also, afterwards, there was a fire after a couple of suicide bombers set thems

off with a very small loss of civilian life and they responded with a fire department who came and put the fire out and again, it was a great response. they were very, very effective. and they all put it together very, very quickly. they have done that multiple times in the past. i believe they'll continue to do that more effectively each time. >> so, sir, the response was very professional and positive but was there a gap in capability of intelligence or security that allowed the attack to take pace and have you tried to plug that? >> the intelligence support required to prevent those attacks continues to get better. the numb of those attack that are thwarted are many, many times greater than the individual ones that get through like that, and we believe that that will continue to be a positive trend in the afghan security forces here in kabul.

>> david wood from the huffington post. you mentioned the 300% increase in cases that you're uncovering. i wondered if you could tell me a couple of things about that. number one, how many cases we're talking about, and secondly if these are ammunition and bomb-making materials and so forth. is there any indication that the insurgents are actually running short as a result of your uncovering these caches. >> the caches are multiple sizes, i couldn't give you a characterization of the exact number. but the bottom line is we have destroyed the support bases and the supplies and put a significant decrease in their capability to supply themselves. at the same time, we are interdicting the supplies coming in and absolutely there has been much intelligence that says they are having a tough

time supplying themselves as easily and in as much volume as they would desire. >> kevin barrenson, "stars and stripes," in your open you seem to support the president's drawdown plan and you said it's a good plan, it's a goal that's achieveable. do you think that there's any unnecessary risk in that plan that has been criticized since then? >> not at all. the decision has been made. new it's -- now it's our turn to execute the decision and we can do that without a significant change in risk that puts any of the mission at risk in this point in time. >> general, chuck hoss kinson from politico. you said before that with the problem of infiltration of

taliban into afghan security forces, as the afghans take over more and more responsibility that there might be a need to accept a greater risk in terms of dealing with that problem. how would you assess the possibility of that risk going forward now and what steps would you be taking to mitigate it? >> the mitigation of that risk is being done by a combination of counterintelligence effort, by the coalition forces and most importantly the afghan national security forces are taking it head on. it's an issue of leadership and knowing your people and the afghan leadership and chain of command is taking that on and i believe we're moving in the right direction with that risk. >> i want to thing che -- change the subject real quick work the upcoming transition in the army, i was wondering if you could talk a little bit about your interactions with

general odeer noah and your thoughts on his leadership for the army going forward. >> i've had just one interact with general odierno at a utility conference but i've known him since we were 18 years old and i'm confident he'll be a great leader. >> can you hear me? we lost your audio and video there shortly. are we back up now?

>> i can hear you loud and clear. >> we lost you when you talked about knowing general odierno since you were 18 years old and then the signal dropped, if you can finish your though there. >> i'm confident 450e8 be a great leader for the army and lead the army of the future very, very effectively. >> thank you, sir. michael? >> i'm from the "london times." one thing you didn't mention in your introduction was the willingness of the taliban to play a part in the future of political solution to the country. what evidence do you have that the taliban is genuinely interested in some sort of deal? or are they just biding their time before 2014 comes up?

>> i think they're trying to take back control of the people in the areas they lost last year. what we focus on is to reintegrate the local fighters that reintegration process is starting to move in the right direction. we had over 2,000 people formally reintegrate in that system and had -- have had another 1,000 or more who are basically silently reintegrating by just becoming part of their communities without going through the formal process. that's what we concentrate on to bring the local fighters back into their communities with the local afghan government and that program continues to improve. >> general if you had the full force of the surge forces through the next fighting season, completely to the end of the year, do you think you could have waged a successful counterinsurgency campaign in the east like you did in the south?

>> we think, again that we're going to be able to wage a successful counterinsurgency campaign in the future. the timing on the -- how that occurs will have to be determined based on the success that we have the rest of this fighting season and through the winter but i'm confident that we can still -- we can accomplish a mission with the resources we have. >> one point of clarification. you were talking about the assault on the hotel in kabul. you mentioned that the afghan security forces worked their way up from the ground floor up to the roof. did the afghan security forces actually kill any of the militants or were the militants all killed by coalition forces? >> they were killed by a

mixture of isaf and coalition forces. what occurred was they chased the suicide bombers up on the roof, that's when our help was most, you know was used mostly. again, all that did was hasten the demise of the enemy. they would have gotten to it in a little bit of time, we just again finished them off quickly when they got on the roof. >> general, just a followup, a little bit more on the violence level. can you break it down a little bit? what's the violence trend in r.c. east in particular and do you anticipate over the next year a shift in effort to r.c. east both shifting the forces and shifting the main effort to r.c. east? is that part of the main campaign plan? >> yes, it is. again, as we continue to maintain the momentum in the

south, and continue to build the capacity of the afghan national security forces, we'll end up thinning out down there first and then focus more and more of our energy in the east. as far as the timing of that, it will be conditions based and it's too early to take that guess right now. >> can you answer about the violence trends in r.c. east? >> the violence trends in r.c. east are up a little from last year but one of the bright spots is that we're finding more of the improvised explosive devices and also there's been a rise in direct fire incidents that are less effective than the attacks have been in the past. >> general rodriguez, i'm from bloomberg news, a couple of questions i wanted to follow up on the reintegration issue. more than 2,000 still seems like a fairly small number,

even more than 3,000 if you add the other thousand to it. how many more do you feel like you need to bring back out of the field? how many more are out there? and the other question, on the board over pakistan and afghanistan, there's been some reporters, pakistan has been complaining about some forces crossing the border from afghanistan and attacking in pakistan and the yen response we've been getting is, you know, vague comments about how the boarder is porous. can you be more specific about exactly what's going on there? are these complaints valid? and what are you doing to try to address those issues? >> on the afghanistan-pakistani cross-border issues. they, again, on the border region, it's very, very rugged

terrain. it is very, very porous, both ways, and some of those forces that reside in that area move across the area and have gone both ways back and forth. both the afghan security forces and the pakistani military forces coordinate our efforts along that border to be able to defeat those forces as effectively as we can but that -- it goes both ways and we have again done a pretty good job coordinating our efforts to defeat that threat. >> can you follow up on the reintegration question? the numbers, how many do you need to reintegrate, what are your targets and why has it lagged? >> the reintegration program that was really just started last year has not really lagged.

it has taken time to get that policy and the procedures spread throughout the -- throughout the nation but the afghans have done that very, very effectively. and the good thing is, right now, that is continuing through the violent season. they're continuing to reintegrate. as far as the number that we need to reintegrate, that's a conditions based number that will be determined basically on how strong those communities are getting as they bring those local boys back into their communities and again it's that combination of good security, good governance and good development that brings those people back together and when the strength of the community gets strong enough, the people will continue to reintegrate silencely just to be part of a better future. >> rose lynn jordan with al-jazeera english.

somebody brought up pakistan, given that country's political and military instability, how helpful has pakistan been in helping us stabilize and secure other areas? we heard a lot of promises from islamabad but in reality how supportive has it been in your efforts? >> again, we need more support and help from the pakistani military. we continue to coordinate and build the relationships to better synchronize our plans across that border but we still need support in doing that. if that continues to be a problem, what that drives us to on this afghanistan side of the border which is what i'm really focused on, is building a tronger community and security forces to be able to hand they will challenges they'll see in the future. >> what specifically are you looking for in support? more cross-border operations?

more intelligence? is the pay larnte growing lack of trust between the u.s. and pakistan having an impact? >> what we really need is less of the i.e.d.'s and the homemade explosives across that border as well as some of the bombmakers and leadership that moves across that border. those are the type of support and help that we're continuing to work with our partners to help us with. >> have you seen them actually try to show a more aggressive posture in stopping pote the crossing of materials and perhaps more important the crossing of the human capacity into afghanistan? are they willing to be there? >> we've seen that in selected areas but again not as much as

we would like and we all think -- and know that they immediate to do more and that's what we work with them a lot every day to do. >> thank you, general. >> general, throughout this morning, you said that overall violence is up, that you're not sure when violence will start to go down. you've also said that in areas where the united states is concentrated, forces have had an impact. despite all that, you said the drawdown of forces, there's no risk of -- no real risk associated with it. can you help me understand how that is, given that -- given all those factors that violence is up and there's no sign of when it will drop? why does it remain not as risky as it appears? >> yes, again the -- the

effectiveness of the contacts has gone down and that's important an also how that can be, the momentum maintained as we move forward is about the growth of the afghan national security forces. just like the surge, last year, we brought in over 40,000 troops. while we draw down those 33,000 u.s. forces in the next -- until -- through late summer, next year, there will be another 70,000 afghan national security forces system of it's the growing capacity of the afghan national security forces the strengthening of their organizations that enable us to continue their momentum without increasing the risk a significant level. >> the performance of the afghan national security force has been inconsistent. is it fair to say that the remaining u.s. troops in afghanistan will have to do more with less?

or will we see them having to do less going forward in terms of stabilizing and securing afghanistan? >> as we look forward, again, the afghan security forces, as their capability builds, will do less of the direct lower level fighting an what we'll be helping them with is the enable capables such as command and control, access to intelligence, access to jointesques, logistics, medevac and such. that will put them more and more in the lead with the fighting as we become more of an enabling force over time. >> general, kathy mccormick from cbs radio. i'd like to you cow -- to ask you on a personal note, how channeling this job has been with you -- for you?

if you're personally satisfied with with where the u.s. effort is right now as you're about to leave? >> this job has been a tremendously challenging job as well as a tremendously rewarding job. i'm confident we've accomplished the objectives we set to date and i'm grateful for the incredible service of the people, the afghans and coalition forces who have made it possible. >> general, have you tried to match up units with the goal -- numerical goals of the drawdown? can you describe what a complex challenge that is? and what are some of the factors you make -- you consider in making the decision of when to drawdown specific areas? >> those factors are really built arn the exass i have to the afghan national security

forces and their leadership and ability to plan and execute and lead operations. again, the real issue for when we can begin the drawdown is when they can accomplish the mission withless of us. that less of us starts with infantry soldiers and the longer term enabling factors i just talked about will be what we enable and support them for the foreseeable future. >> in your briefing in february and in today, you stressed the importance of the afghan national government, the afghan government capability for transition success. how do you quantify that success? and how does it stand right now? >> first of all, we look at both the provincial and district government. and what they have to do is be table be acceptable enough to

the afghan people that they don't are a negative impact on security. when the people become mobilized and they build a representative state that represents the people and holds government accountable, then we're on the right track. that government has to provide security, justice and a representative opportunity. you can -- it's pretty easy for the leaders on the ground to see those things because again, the people go about their daily business and live their life the way they want to. >> one more. >> i have a contracting question for you. there's a lot of consideration on capitol hill that u.s. tax dollars are going to afghan companies with ties to the taliban or other insurgent groups. you set up task force 2010 last year to semithis problem. how successful have you been in ep shoe -- ensuring that u.s.

tax dollars are not going to firls connected to the taliban or other insurgents? >> we have a document that we put out called contracting guides and we're following that. what that has done is enabled us to vet our contractors and break down the contracts so it's spread more easily throughout the -- evenly throughout the nation an allowed the afghan people to be the ones who hold the contractors accountable. we're on a great trajectory to improve that over and over again. i think we're on a good path for higher level of what we do for contracting. >> courtney. one. >> general, just very quickly you said several times today that the progress that you've seen is indisputable. but the words you haven't used are two we have seared in our

brains an that's fragile and reversible. do you still consider the project to be fragile or reversible? >> it is still fragile and reversible. that's starting to get past that level in selected areas but there's still very few. because this is about afghan people's trust and confidence, we've still got a little bit more way to go before we make it more durable, which is the objective here. >> all right, general, that's it from here. i'll send it back to you for your closing remarks. >> based on my experience here, i have a lot of faith in the new leadership and general scaparotti, he's a great friend of mine and followed me many time. i have a lot of faith in the coalition efforts and in the local afghan forces and their

ability to build momentum and accomplish their mission. thank you for your questions and your interest in afghanistan. thank you. >> thank you, sir. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011] >> when the u.s. house returns today, legislative business getting under way in about 15 minutes. the main work in the house this week will be the 2012 defense spending bill. look for lots of amendment debate this afternoon. also expected the u.s. commitment to a negotiated settlement of the israeli-palestinian conflict and a bill for energy and water development, the spending bill for 2012 and an overhaul to the

flood insurance program. we'll have live house coverage here again at 2:00 p.m. on c-span. until then, some of the views of today's "washington journal" callers. baltimore sun." stocks hang on the unemployment report. early in the article it says -- further in the article, it says --

we want to hear from all of you. what do you think? what is your experience? dividing the phone lines and little bit differently this morning -- we want to spend the first part of this morning's program talking to you about the job market ahead of friday's unemployment report. what is your experience? given up -- charles, illinois. caller: good morning, c-span. i have given up, i have to say. i was employed until last week, 20 hours a week, through northern illinois area agency on

aging which provides for seniors. i am 62. as of july 1 we were cut back to 13 hours. this is a minimum wage job. this is for people who have given up. we are all over 60. we are all college educated. and the idea is we are supposed to find employment. well, i am here to tell you, the job creators are not creating employment for us. host: what kind of jobs are you applying for, and what is it like? caller: i am a high-school teacher, i am a social worker with plenty of experience. those are both public sector jobs, under attack in ellen on -- illinois. there is just nothing there.

can i tell you about the one victory we had at our agency? a guy named ray, a cost accountant, who got a job three months ago. we all through our hands in the air and were so happy, a job created had created a job for ray. he worked there for 32 days. as soon as their cost accounting needs were completed, then the job creator became what i call a job destroyer. fired ray, he is no longer applicable for the government's supply jumpy had before -- he will lose his house and he does not have a car anymore -- or he will lose his carson. this is the problem with the job creators who are not really job creators. i don't know what to say. host: let us go to tell me who has a job in maryland.

caller: i am lucky that i have a job. everybody is not luckie. this is a great country, you know? over and over again uc how the politicians are destroying this country. saudi arabia, for example, just raised their minimum wage $6,000 a year -- we have to understand something. we need to be patient. the recent we are here today it was not created overnight. what i m trying to say now is for us to arrive at where we want, it is going to take time. looking at the unemployment report, we were having some progress, but it is very slow. we have to allow time to heal. host: let me stop you there, because according to this piece

it, one economist says at this rate the country will not be putting enough people to work until 2023. do you think people are patient enough to wait that long? caller: no, that is not what i am trying to say. what i am saying is we need to be patient. as an area -- if you are building a house, it takes time to build a day -- build a house. but you can pull it down and one day. it is going to take time -- months, or even a year to build the house. we have a serious problem at hand and it will take both parties to come together to fix the problem. the republicans need to stop there demagoguing and political maneuvers because all they are doing is how to win elections. host: let's talk to danny who is looking for a job in flint, michigan. what happened? are you there?

port st. lucie, florida. scott, what happened? caller: i would say about two or three years ago my company ousted me. they took some cuts and the people who have been than the long as it had to lose their jobs. next thing i know they let my workers go -- i was the supervisor -- and they brought in a van from the labor force and started people with a brand new jobs with the lowest minimum wage. the job agencies, what they do is they help you with your interview skills and right resumes, when in reality there are no jobs out there. they are helping you to get skills for jobs that and don't exist. what people don't understand is 200,000 people lose their jobs every day -- i am sorry, every month. when they finish their unemployment they get wiped off of their unemployment list and

they are counted as not looking any more. this has been going on for two years -- every month of these people get wiped out and they are not accounted for. these people still need jobs and they are not doing anything about it. the greenhouse of jobs -- solar panels, reconstruction of the road, once the panels are put up, when to these roads are filled, they are out of the job. i think congress needs to pay attention -- no cuts to social security, no cuts to medicare no matter what. we need to pull and give from that type -- take from the top and give to the bottom and let's give these companies a tax break so they can expand and hire more people in the private sector, and the government as not understanding that. host: bii tweets in this -- before we get back to the phone

call we want to show you a few more headlines about the debt talkst debthe hill" newspaper reports democrats are looking for a 50-50 split of taxes and cuts. it says -- also this morning, president obama plans to hold his first twitter town hall. the white house is billing this event today as a real-time conversation with president obama via twitter. but what will the discussion look like? participants are limited to 140 characters. questions are filtered and the president is not typing. and also in other news, " washington post" from page -- many of the newspapers have this --

commitment to try as many cases as possible in civilian courts. this story about immigration, setting the extraordinary mexican migration that delivered millions of illegal immigrants to the united states over the past 30 years has sputtered to a trickle. research points to a surprising cause -- also, the new head of the imf will hold its first news conference today. here is a picnic -- picture of her the first day of work. "the washington post" has heard salary. on tuesday, the imf published

christine lagarde's contract, including the salary, -- orlando, florida. kenny has given up looking for a job. why? caller: good morning. i have been looking for a job for a long time -- unemployed for about three years. i lost my job. i had a really good paying job. just applying for so many jobs at one time. i couldn't even tell when i would get a phone call -- i would have no idea who was calling me because i applied for 50 jobs in the last one or two

days. i would be real confused. and then i would go out for day labor, i worked day labor for months and months. i would be there with a lot of other americans of building construction for 40 bucks a day. it was not working. host: why wasn't it working? caller: because when you are working day labor all day you can't apply for jobs. and by the time you get home you are so tired from being out in the sun all day, and then when you are applying for jobs, they are calling you during the day but you are out doing the work. it is more complicated than it seems. i finally realized that i qualified for unemployment --

because i was using my own savings and it was depleted over this whole two-year period. i took the first payments -- paid registration and ended up going into law school. completely given up looking for a job. i am in law school now. host: how are you able to pay for that? caller: loans, and luckily my credit was good enough to get the loans that he made. because he also have to have good credit. i am sure other people who maybe have families in the same situation with their credit -- going to professional school, they probably won't be able to get the loan. host: many of you heard president obama said last week

saying congress could send him a job as bill right now. politico talks about the legislation. a bumpy path for senator's loan plan -- the san antonio, john has a job. what do you think about the job market? caller: i guess you could say the job market is there -- but all the haggling right now, they

want to give some much money to road construction and what not. that is the wrong place to put money. unless they put it -- like, they are trying to balance the federal budget right now. i assure you, unless they cut government jobs and government programs that have been with us the last hundred years, they will never, ever balance the budget. in order for us to get to work in the private sector that you really need, we've got to get government off our backs with all the regulations. like many of the guys have all they said -- the problem is not trying to get a job necessarily worth while, the problem is government is preventing the private sector from creating jobs. because they got a job. bay don't care about anybody else. -- they don't care about any well -- in one of did you need to tell government to cut the jobs they got. you can't pay janitors in the government's $60,000 while the

private sector only makes 18,000. it has to change soon. host: east point, michigan. caller: i work at a salon for 22 years. the last three years i have lost about 80% of my clients. host: 80%? caller: i went from making 80,000 years down to 28 -- like when i was just out of college. what i noticed is everyone talks about giving the corporations big tax breaks. haven't they had it tax breaks for like a decade and there are no jobs? do we want to continue to give these people tax breaks? those who probably at the top 1% probably are republicans and i think they are playing games so they can make more money. so, i don't know what is going on.

i and and definitely disappointed with the democrats, my party. host: why you disappointed? caller: i do not think they are doing enough. i think we are too divided. i think people are too worried about religion, social >> we leave today's "washington journal" for live action from the u.s. house as they come in to take up fiscal spending for 2012. lots of amendment votes expected this afternoon. live coverage now. urposes is u.s. ker: the house will be in order. the prayer will be offered today by our chaplain, father conroy. chaplain conroy: let us pray. eternal god, we give you thanks for giving us another day. as the house reconvenes we ask your blessing upon deliberations informed by the experiences and interactions by the members with their constituents. we thank you for the time to be together with family and friends as our nation

celebrated 235 years of being a marvelous experience in the self-governance of a people but together by ideals entrusting in the ability of a free people to govern themselves in justice and peace. mindful of this great heritage and the hard work and sacrifices of so many american ancestors to us all, may the members of this people's house deliberate in good faith. mindful not only of a short-term interest but of their place in history and of tremendous responsibility to govern wisely for a bright future for our nation. may all that is done this day in the wake of our national celebration be for your greater honor and glory. amen. the speaker: the chair has examined the journal of the last day's proceedings and announces to the house his approval thereof. pursuant to clause 1 of rule 1 the journal stands approved.

the pledge will be led today by the gentlelady from north carolina, ms. foxx. ms. foxx: please join me in the pledge to our wonderful flag. i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. the speaker: the chair will entertain requests for one-minute speeches. for what purpose does the gentleman from south carolina rise? mr. wilson: mr. speaker, i ask permission to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. wilson: mr. speaker, the university of south carolina men's baseball team ended the college world series this season just as they did last year, the gamecocks are our national champions again. back-to-back victories. by beating the florida gators on june 28 at omaha, nebraska, t.d. amayor trade park, they --

ameritrade park, they became the only team to win back-to-back national championships. they won in record-setting fashion. they are the first team to go 10-0. they are both all-time records. in the title game, only allowed two runs by the gators. he was held by a series most outstanding player, scott lingo, who not only made a couple of runs, and the coach must be credited for putting the pieces together again for steering them to a win. in conclusion, god bless our troops and we will never forget september 11 and the global war on terrorism. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from connecticut rise? >> to address the house for one minute and to revise and

extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman from connecticut is recognized for one minute. mr. courtney: thank you, mr. speaker. i rise to honor the life of arthur of estonian, connecticut. it's important for us to remember art's remarkable service to his community. he was part of the greatest generation serving in the submarine force for 20 distinguished years. his career in the navy include time aboard one of the substance that executed the wolfpack attack strategy in the sea of japan. it was instrumenting in the pacific and a central ingredient to final victories. during the conflict he earned the bronze star and after the war rows to the rank of command -- rose to the rank of commander. he tried to improve the quality of life in southeastern connecticut. he taught math to high schoolers all across the state. he coached little league, served on the board of education and became one of the first mayors in his district.

he will be missed by his wife, child and grandchild. his service is an inspiration for us today and for generations to come. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from illinois rise? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. shimkus: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, we are all glued to our televisions and the internet watching the egyptian people, christian and muslim alike, demanding free and fair elections for the first time. the history of the christian church in egypt far exedens that -- exceeds that than islam. extreme groups attacked the fellow egyptians simply because they are christians in an attempt to drive them out of egypt. in some cases they were successful. our country was founded on the principles of religious

freedom. as a christian and member of the house of representatives, i'm hopeful that this example of a broad range of beliefs of 435 members will stand as an example to the egyptian people. i will ask the egyptian people and the current military leadership to stand with the christian minority in egypt and ask them to surely practice their faith is not impugned by the current leadership or the one that may be elected in the future. i will continue to keep the helicopteric christians in egypt in my prayers and i will ask my colleagues to do the same. with that i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from tennessee rise? mr. cohen: to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman from tennessee is recognized for one minute. mr. cohen: thank you, mr. speaker. last weekend while most americans were celebrating the fourth of july, montanans were immersed what has become the new american tradition, cleaning up oil spills. after exxon's silver tip pipeline failed and spewed 40,000 gallons of toxic oil into the yellowstone river,

exxon quickly labeled the incident a freak accident, a phrase commonly used by the oil industry after spills. but an exhaustive history of big oil spills these are not freak accidents but evidence of big oil's neglect. empty safety promises belongs to transcanada who dubbed the keystone pipeline the safest pipeline ever built. a year and 1 spills later keystone was shut down and deemed an imminent threat to life, property and the environment. before we permit the keystone e.x. pipeline, another deadly transcanada pipeline, we must reform our safety regulation because our pipeline must be as consistent as old faithful. thank you, mr. speaker. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentlelady from north carolina rise? ms. foxx: i ask permission to address the house for one minute, mr. speaker.

the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentlelady is recognized for one minute. ms. foxx: thank you, mr. speaker. last weekend we celebrated america's independence day. as i visited with constituents, they asked that we create another independence movement. independence from middle eastern oil, and i agree. unfortunately, rather than pursuing energy independence, the obama administration keeps fostering an energy dependence policy that costs american jobs, brings higher prices at the pump and endangers our national security by making us more dependent on unstable middle eastern governments. house republicans have responded by introducing and passing four bills to increase our domestic energy production and create american jobs, but the senate has taken no action. liberal democrats are obstructing the opportunity for jobs for americans, lower energy costs and a new era of independence. it's time, mr. speaker, to declare independence from middle eastern oil and start using our own resources for the benefit of all americans. i yield back the balance of my

time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back the balance of her time. for what purpose does the gentleman from ohio rise? mr. kucinich: mr. speaker, i ask permission to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman from ohio is recognized for one minute. mr. kucinich: thank you very much, mr. speaker. within the next 24 hours the house will have the opportunity to end u.s. military involvement in libya, and we should do so for the following reasons -- first, the war is illegal under the united states constitution and our war powers act. because only the u.s. congress has the authority to declare war and the president has been unable to show that the u.s. faced an imminent threat from libya. he ignored his top legal advisors at the peck and the department of justice -- pentagon and the department of justice. second, the war has reached a stalemate and is unwinnable without the deployment of nato ground troops to effectively invade the nation of libya. it was ill conceived from the

beginning. the benghazi based opposition, they don't have the support of the majority of libyans. one which had reportedly backed by the c.i.a. in the 1980's should never have launched an armed civil war against the government if they had no chance absent a massive nato air campaign and the introduction of nato troops. it's time to put an end to this war. vote to cut off funds. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from michigan rise? >> i ask permission to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman from michigan is recognized for one minute. >> mr. speaker, rising unemployment continues to populate the headlines. an article last week by the a.p. points out that several cities in my state of michigan, including battle creek, which i have the privilege of representing, has big unemployment. michigan's unemployment stands at 10%. it exacerbates bad situations.

we do not need more spending, rising energy costs, government takeover of health care and more regulations. mr. walberg: our republican colleagues and i have put forth a jobs plan. we know government cannot create jobs. instead, we can support an environment where the private sector flourishes and creates jobs. our jobs plan will reduce regulatory burdens which are currently costing small businesses over $10,000 per employee each year, requiring congressional approval for each regulation that has a significant impact on the economy. our jobs plan will reform the tax code, streamlining and lowering tax rate. our jobs plan will increase domestic energy production and cut unsustainable spending which crushes burdens of debt. at home last week i was constantly reminded how the lack of good commonsense, good-paying jobs is helping my constituents. the speaker pro tempore: the

gentleman's time has expired. mr. walberg: it's time we stand for the next generation. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentlelady from minnesota rise? ms. mccollum: to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. ms. mccollum: our state is shut down due to a budget crisis. i want to thank the governor for making productive compromises and never forgetting the needs of minnesotans, especially our most vulnerable citizens. the republicans want to cut health, education and law enforcement. in congress and in minnesota, republicans use the same playbook. first, create a crisis, put jobs at risk and the economy in peril and then ignore the needs of middle-class families. and then fight to protect the interests of millionaires and billionaires. what we are seeing in washington and st. paul is a

radical tea party extremism, theyening jobs and the economy with destruction in the name of political advantage. this is a dangerous political strategy and it needs to end now. democrats and republicans need to work together to solve our nation's problem. the american people and minnesotans expect that of their elected leaders. with that i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yields back her time. for what purpose does the gentleman from illinois rise? >> i ask permission to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> thank you, mr. speaker. i stand to tell a rare success story that i saw firsthand last week. custom aluminum products, a local manufacturing business, ploge more than 360 people, is celebrating their 50th anniversary this year. mr. shilling: they have grown from a small local manufacturer to a nationally recognized leader in the aluminum industry. i tell the story today because custom aluminum is a thriving local business, ack selling.

mr. hultgren: we have much to learn about this. given to excell our small business will answer the call and it is never the role of the federal government to create jobs. instead, government must get out of the way of small businesses by reducing job-killing regulations and bureaucratic red tape and allowing the job creators to do what they do best, create jobs. we must bring back certainty to the small business community and rebuild their confidence in our economy so we can get americans working again and celebrate many more local success stories like this in the coming months and years. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from texas rise? >> i ask permission to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman from texas is recognized for one minute. mr. neugebauer: -- >> the story title "medicaid payments go under the knife." this is an issue that

unfortunately is going to continue to get worse. medicaid isn't just going under the knife, it's being slashed. the simple truth is is only an empty promise for people who may need services and the affordable care act, the affordable care act is only going to exacerbate patient access to physicians. mr. burgess: it has changed what was a program that was designed for the poorest of the poor, pregnant women, children and the elderly, and turn it is into a one-size-fits-all government program. it will add millions of younger adults, putting an even greater strain on the state budgets. the health care law never addressed the root problem. we need to ensure that medicaid spending is directed in a fashion at that provides an actual safety net for those in need and allow states to create a range of products so to give medicaid patients access to their physicians and better

care. we actually need to get back to the basics and it's essential that we examine medicaid and realize the ramifications before our states sink even deeper into a budgetary crisis. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from virginia rise? >> to address the house for one minute and revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> thank you, mr. speaker. china recently rolled out the red carpet, the president is behind me, this indicted war criminal, who was fund guilty of murder and rape. prior to the visit, i wrote a president to the chinese president urging him cancel the visit. not only is bashir wanted for

his atrossities in darfur but atrocities are now unfolding against christians in the mountains, daily reports of killings, indiscriminately shelling civilian populations. consider this reality, bashir is a wanted war criminal, the chinese government treats him as a trend and extends every diplomatic grace and china owns our debt. what is wrong with this picture? an indicted war criminal with the president of china. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman rise? >> to address the house for one minute and revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. >> i rise today to address the gentleman from texas who spoke a minute ago. it's true that medicare needs to be reformed an costs need to

be reebed -- reined. in the answer certainly does not lie and the republican budget passed on a party line vote which will dispantle medicare as we know it, turning into a voucher system, the ryan plan, and turning medicare into a block grant program which would further hurt our states at a delicate miami of their recovery. the republican budget is not the answer. s the death nell for a program that -- it is the death nell for a program that covers a third of all americans. >> for what purpose does the gentleman rise in >> i rise to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. lankford: i spent the holiday week listening to

people in my district. no one said they wanted more government interference. no one said they wanted to celebrate independence day by having more government oversight. we need real spending limits to offset our serious budget shortfall. we can't continue this way. there's a limit to the debt we can carry. our current debt equals our g.d.p., and i hope that many in the house see that as a problem as well. we need to overhaul our entitlements. they are necessary for some but they will go broke if no one is held accountable. 15 years ago, the balanced budget amendment failed to pass the senate by one vote after it passed this house with

overwhelming bipartisan support. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. mr. lank spord: ill say went doe have a debt ceiling trote vote crisis, we have a debt crisis. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from texas rise? mr. poe: request permission to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. poe: madam speaker, a 16-year-old was abducted, raped and strangled in 2004. her cull was crushed and her bodily left on a dirt road -- in 1994. her skull was crushed and her bodily was left on a birt road in san antonio. tomorrow, he is -- her convicted murderer is going to be -- is ke jeweled to be put to death. but they say texas violated his rights by not allowing him to

speak to a mexican consul. however, the supreme court has already ruled that it's not required unless congress intervenes. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from georgia rise? >> to address the house for one minute and revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. broun: today we ask president obama why he won't support the energy bills in this house. we also ask why he's keeping energy resources offlimits. an exsm of the bills passed by the house are three that came out of the natural resors

committee that would have created 1.2 million jobs. president obama won't support those. the sad truth is that we know the answers to these questions because the swradmrgs has made it cher they want to export american jobs and invest in other countries' resources rather than developing our own. republicans want to keep our -- help our economy by creating jobs and creating energy independence but liberals in congress are standing in the kay. -- in the way. madam speaker, i urge my colleagues to consider all the good energy republican bills would do for republicans -- for our prices and our gas tanks. it is imperative the senate pass these bills and the president sign them into law. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from west virginia raise? >> address the house for one minute and revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: the

gentlewoman is recognized for one minute. >> right now, the president is hosting his first ever twitter town hall to gather input from concerned americans. here's input from concerned west virginians, people strog choose whether to buy groceries or gas as energy prices skyrocket and the economy continues to remain slow and unrecovered. mrs. capito: if west virginiaians are wondering about one thing it's why the president isn't doing more to lower energy costs and get our cupry back on track. america is truly blessed to have an inabun daunt supply of natural resources. frankly, i'm stunned as to why the president hasn't connected that a good, solid jobs plan is a good, solid energy plan. last month, a.e.p. announced it will shout down plants in ohio, west virginia, and ohio, costing jobs, payroll, and raising electricity 15%. this is a direct response to

new and burdensome regulations levied by the e.p.a. in the last year. it's time to take vng of the resources found here in america. doing so will launch our economy in the right direction and create thousands of good-paying jobs. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from north carolina rise? >> to address the house for one minute and request permission to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. >> mr. speaker, the obama scradmrgs has moved our country backward in terms of energy production. the moratorium on offshore drilling is causing a significant decline in energy production. when president obama took office these areas were open to drilling and production. since then, president obama has taken steps to effectively reimpose an offshore drilling ban. mr. speaker, this is an issue of common sense. failure to develop our offshore

energy resources is increasing our dependence on foreign sources of oil and denying much-needed revenue to help pay down the national debt. but most importantly, it is costing us american jobs. we have an abundant supply of natural resources off of our shores. common sense dictates that the use of our own resources to meet the energy needs, an i co-sponsored and voted in favor of h r. 1231, reversing of president obama's offshore moratorium act. not surprisingly, the senate has failed to consider this ill of. mrs. ellmers: we will continue to push more access to our nrnl resources. thank you, mr. speaker the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back her time. the chair lays before the house a communication. the clerk: the honorable the speaker, house of representatives, sir, pursuant to the permission granting in clause 2h of rule 2 of the

rules of the u.s. house of representatives, the clerk receives the following message from the secretary of the senate on yull 1, 2011, at 11:50 a.m. appointments, united states-china interparliamentary group, with best wishes i am, signed sincerely, karen l. haas. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from florida rise? >> madam speaker, i ask

unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and exclude -- and include extraneous material on h.r. 2219. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. pursuant to house resolution 320 and rule 18, the chair declares the house in committee of the whole house on the state of the union for the further consideration of h.r. 2219. will the gentleman from texas, mr. poe, kindly take the chair. the chair: the house is in the committee of the whole house on the state of the union for the further consideration of h.r. 2219 which the clerk will report by title. the clerk: a bill making

appropriationers in department of defense for the fiscal year ending september 30, 2012, and for other purposes. the chair: when the committee of the whole on thursday, june 23, 2011, all time for yen debate had expired. pursuant to the rule the bill shall be considered for amendment under the five-minute rule. during consideration of the bill for amendment, the chair may accord priority and recognition to a member offering an amendment who has caused it to be printed in the designated place in the congressional record. those amendments will be considered read. the clerk will read. the clerk: be it enacted the following sums are appropriated for fiscal year 2012. namely, title 1, military personnel, military personnel, army, $43,859,709,000. military personnel, navy,

$27,141,334,000. military personnel, marine corps. $13,480,436,000. military personnel. air force. $28,264,646,000. reserve personnel. army. $4,333,507,000. reserve personnel, navy, $1,948,544,000. reserve personnel marine corps. $645,422,000. reserve personnel, air force. $1,711,653,000. national guard personnel. army, $7,607,345,000. national guard personnel, air force.

$3,099,629,000. title 2, operation and maintenance. operation and maintenance, army. $34,581,321,000. operation ant maintenance, navy, $49,389,685,000. operation and maintenance, marine corps, $6,036,936,000. operation and maintenance, air force, $36,065,107,000. operation and maintenance, defense-wide, $30,-- >> mr. chairman. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from virginia rise? >> mr. chairman, i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment.

the clerk will report the amendment. the clerk: amendment offered by mr. connolly of virginia. after the dollar amount insert reduced by $10 million. page 31, line 17, after the dollar amount, insert increase by $10 million. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. connolly: i thank the chair. first, i want to thank chairman young, ranking member dicks and their staff for working with me on operational energy challenges by department of defense. operation energy represented 43% in 2010 and despite a 9% reduction in energy use, cost increased by 19.7%. air conditioning alone from

american forces in iraq and afghanistan cost $20 million each year. last year's bill to heat, cool and light, 539,000 d.o.d. buildings was more than 3,000 war fighters and contractors had been killed in the line of duty while moving or defending fuel convoys. we cannot continue sacrificing american drives as a result of failing to approve energy use by our military. included in the bill is a targeted investment of $82 million for marine core expeditionary equipment to prevent our marines from carrying more than 13 million pounds of gear and will help taxpayers of nearly $40 million in annual energy related costs. thank you, chairman young and ranking member dicks for including this funding in the bill. this bipartisan amendment would complement that investment by operational energy by increasing funding for the strategic environmental research and development program, known as certificatea. from $56.4 million to what

matches the president's request and the house-passed national department of defense act. i offered this amendment on behalf of myself and mr. bartlett of maryland and mr. hinchey of new york. as members of the armed services appropriations committees respectively, they have been leaders in the effort to secure energy security. unfortunately, with all the funding this would provide, the pentagon would be forced to delay or can sell certain environmental programs. for example, this will support the joint center of emissions program which develops alternatives to t.n.t. these alternatives are electrotoxic and lower cleanup costs. and it will have forward operating bases in combat zones. it is not to protect the environment near the bases but to reduce fuel and water waste. mr. chairman, this amendment will also help our military

adapt to climate change. in virginia, norfolk naval bases located at sea level, we're witnessing larger sea levels in the chesapeake bay. it was recommended by the president. i do not believe we should risk delaying or canceling these critical defense programs and ask my colleagues to support this bipartisan amendment. and with that i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman may not reserve his time. does he yield back? mr. connolly: i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back. >> mr. chairman. the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman from ohio rise? mr. kucinich: mr. chairman, i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: there is an amendment pending before the house. does anyone seek to be heard on the gentleman from virginia's

amendment? mr. dicks: mr. chairman. the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman rise? mr. dicks: i move to strike the requisite number of words. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. dicks: i rise to support the gentleman's amendment. it would realign $10 million to support additional work within the strategic environmental research and development program. the program was established in 1990 and is jointly planned and executed by the department of defense, the department of energy, the environmental protection agency and other federal agencies and industry. the program provides d.o.d. mission readiness and environmental performance by providing new scientific knowledge and cost-effective technologies in the areas of environmental restoration, munitions and response, resource conservation and weapon systems and platforms. sdrp enhances military

operations, improves military systems, effectiveness, enhances military training and readiness, sustains d.o.d.'s training and test ranges and insulation infrastructure and helps ensure the safety and welfare of military personnel and their dependence by eliminating or reducing the generation of pollution and use of hazardous materials and reducing the cost of remedial action. i urge my colleagues to support this amendment. the chair: does the gentleman yield back his time? mr. dicks: i yield back. the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman rise? mr. young: mr. chairman, i rise in opposition to the amendment. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. young: mr. chairman, this would -- this amendment would offer $10 million to a cut that the kp had already made. in the defensewide accounts. actually, the defense department offered up this --

when we were looking for savings to achieve the $10 billion $the -- the $9 billion, this is one area where the defense department indicated the cut. you will hear me throughout the day and throughout the evening as long as we're dealing with this bill. we had to come up with $9 billion in reductions from the president's request. this is part of where we got the $9 billion, and since the department did not have any objection to this, in fact, offered this up as a possible way of helping with the savings, i must oppose this amendment and ask that the members do so. i yield back my time. the chair: the gentleman yields back. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from virginia. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no.

in the opinion of the chair, the noes have it. mr. connolly: mr. chairman. the chair: the gentleman from virginia. mr. connolly: on that matter i ask for a recorded vote. the chair: pursuant to clause 6 of rule 18, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from virginia will be postponed. for what purpose does the gentleman from georgia rise? mr. broun: mr. chairman, i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 23 printed in the congressional record offered by mr. broun of georgia. the chair: the gentleman from georgia, dr. broun, is recognized for five minutes. mr. broun: thank you, mr. chairman. my amendment would reduce the operating budget of the office of defense secretary by 10%, moving roughly $217 million to the spending reduction account. i spent a considerable amount

of time here on the floor of the house during this appropriations process working hard to find spending cuts across every level of the federal government and across nearly every agencies. the office of the secretary has roughly $2.1 billion included in this bill for its operation fund for this fiscal year which is four times the combined operating budget of the secretary -- secretaries in our previous f.y. 2012 appropriations bills. i understand the challenges of the secretary of defense faces on a daily basis and the enormity of the department he is tasked with overseeing. but even the department of defense must do its part to reduce the deficit. i urge support of this amendment, mr. speaker, and yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from washington. kix diction reck --

mr. dicks: i move to strike the requisite number of words and i rise in opposition to the amendment. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. dicks: i rise in very strong opposition to the gentleman's amendment. it appears to be directed at funded in operation defensewide for the office of the secretary of defense. the operation and maintenance defensewide account received a thorough review during the committee process and has already been reduced by $258 million from the budget request. the office of the secretary of defense account has similarly been reduced by $36.4 million based on a detailed review of specific programs within this account. adjustments have been made to duplicative efforts and to programs that were poorly justified. further redictions risk harm to operations in the defensewide account such as special operations activities,

education programs like the national defense university and the defense acquisition university and organizations that perform basic operational functions like finance and human resources. i urge all my colleagues to vote against this amendment. >> will the gentleman yield? mr. dicks: i yield. the chair: the gentleman from georgia is recognized. mr. broun: i appreciate the gentleman yielding. actually, this just cuts the money, 10% out of the office of the secretary of defense. it doesn't go into cutting special ops or other funds that the gentleman from washington, my good friend, mr. dicks, was talking about. it just cuts 10% out of the secretary's operating budget. and i just wanted to clear that up, and i thank the gentleman for yielding. mr. dicks: unfortunately, that's not the way the gentleman wrote his amendment. so i will stand with my provision that says further reductions risks harm to the defensewide account which is --

so if you take 10% out of the account it's going to affect special operations activity, education programs like the national defense university, defense acquisition university. and lord knows we need help in acquisition. and operations that perform functions like human resources. i stand by my statement and yield back my time. the chair: the gentleman yields back his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from florida rise? mr. young: mr. chairman, i rise in opposition to the amendment and i do so reluctantly because i -- the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. young: i do so reluctantly because i know that my good friend is very sincere about this. however, mr. dicks has spoken the position established by the subcommittee very well, and i endorse the comments that mr. dicks made and rise in opposition to this amendment and i yield back my time. the chair: the gentleman yields back his time. the question is on amendment

offered by the gentleman from georgia. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the noes have it. mr. broun: mr. speaker. the chair: the gentleman from georgia. mr. broun: i ask for a recorded vote. the chair: pursuant to clause 6 of rule 18, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from georgia will be postponed. the gentleman from georgia. >> mr. chairman, i have an amendment at the desk. mr. connolly: it's amendment number 9. mr. blumenauer. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 9 printed in the congressional record offered by mr. connolly of virginia. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. connolly: thank you, mr. chairman. i'm offering this amendment on behalf of mr. blumenauer, mr. hinchey and mrs. capps who were unable to arange flight schedules to get back here for this consideration. mr. blumenauer's amendment would increase funding for the

environmental security technologies certification program by $15 million to match the authorization of the national defense authorization act passed by the house earlier this spring. according to the department, facilities represent at least $4 billion in direct costs to the taxpayer this year. the department is paying to heat, cool, light and operate 539,000 buildings and structures holding 2.2 billion square feet. the certification program is focused on funding -- finding ways to decrease energy demand, develop smart distribution systems and increase alternative renewable energy at u.s. military installations. it was established in 1995 to promote the deployment of proven innovative technologies to field oil production use. the program demonstrations collect costs and performance status for new technologies -- to help these new technologies to overcome barriers to the development. the goals is to help d.o.d. improve its environmental

remediation such as unexploded ordinance, cleanup, energy performance and cost savings. scap funds in five areas, including weapon systems and platforms. it has a concept that is focused on finding ways to decrease energy demand, increase the use of alternative and renewable energy at military installations worldwide. these projects include energy-efficient lighting, heating, daylight harvesting, personized dimming, high-performance cooling technology. scap's funding initiatives that will make advancements to building control retrofits such as the management systems and the zero energy housing which generate 100% of their power requirements through onsite renewable and demand reductions. the led streetlighting system will have 50% reductions under

existing streetlight systems at d.o.d. facilities around the united states. an additional $15 million above the president's budget request will help address the immense challenge our military facilities energy requirements represent. it has authorized scap at $40 million and the authorize has created 82-5 for that purpose. i appreciate mr. blumenauer's work on security issues, including this amendment, and i ask for its favorable consideration and yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from florida is recognized. mr. young: i rise in opposition to the amendment. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. young: the amendment would redistribute $30 million of o.e.m. funding to recertify the program. the program is not authorized. it was added by the house armed services committee but the defense bill is not law.

this program currently is not authorized and because of that, the amendment had to be written in such a way a straight increase or decrease, without actually mentioning the actual program. to avoid being out of order. further, the army o.&m account is funded at over $34.5 billion. should this project remain in the final authorization bill, and the department concurs that it is a high enough priority, then there are more than enough funds for them to execute the program. unfortunately, however, i don't have the ability to make that determination for them on the floor and because of these and other objections, i must oppose the amendment. i yield back my time. the chair: the gentleman yields back his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from washington rise? >> i rise to strike the requisite number of words. the chair: the gentleman is

recognized for five minutes. mr. dicks: i have to oppose this amendment, regrettably. my good friend from oregon, mr. blumenauer is one of our most thoughtful members, always a leader on environmental issue bus in this case, we've doubled the funding if this and i think this is unnecessary at this time and we have to constrain spending. i yield back my time. the chair: the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from virginia. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the noes have it. >> mr. chairman. the chair: the gentleman from virginia. mr. connolly: on that matter, i would ask on behalf of myself and mr. blumenauer for a recorded vote. the chair: pursuant to clause 6 of rule 18, further proceedings on the question of the gentleman from virginia will be postponed. for what purpose does the gentleman rise? mr. kucinich: i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will

report the amendment. the clerk: amendment offered by mr. kucinich of ohio. on page five, line six, after the dollar amount $decreased by $3 million. page one, line -- page 33, line six, after the dollar amount, insert raised -- increased by $3,600,000. mr. kucinich: this will bring the modest budget for the gulf car illness program in line with that of its peer programs to $10 million too many veterans of the first gulf war suffer from persistent symptoms such as chronic headache,

widespread pain, cognitive difficulties, unexplained failure, gastro intestinal problems and other abnormalities not explained by traditional medical or psychiatric diagnoses. research shows as these brave soldiers age, they are at double the risk for a.l.s. or lou gehrig's disease, as their nondeployed peers. there may also be connections to multiple sclerosis and parkinson's disease. sadly, there are no known treatmenters in lifelong pain these veterans endure. in a new landmark report, the institute of medicine has recognized that and called for a major national research effort to identify treatments. the scientific community has responded with a dramatic increase in the quality and quantity of proposals that are submitted to medical research

programs, otherwise known as cdmrp. in the february 12 appropriations bill, cdmp with direct relation to the gulf war is -- toost vital as summarized by the committee ochair on the popic, dr. stephen hauser, gulf war study is vital for current and future gulf war veterans. in addition, they have completed the first successful pilot study of a medication to treat one of the major symptoms of golf -- gulf war illness. just last month, a report was released on the first successful medication program

study in the history of gulf war illness research. the study showed that the low cost supplement, coen siem q-10 prore-deuced symptoms in gulf war illness, fatigue with exers, as well as other recertain. the next step is for clinical trials which will only be funded by the cdmrp. the amendments' off the -- the amendment's offset comes from the pentagon channel which is costly, over $29 million in the past three fiscal years. test dun daunt, there are eight other armed force television services providing entertainment and information to military and their family. but this research is critical

to those fighting now and in the future. the known cause of gulf war illness are from exposures to known causes are from exposures in iraq, like certain pesticides or ex-pe sures incurred before deemployment, for example from taking a drug that's a vaccine for sarin gas. curn forces in iraq and afghanistan can still incur each of these exposures. that's why the chair of the i.o.m. committee said, quote, this report makes fippedings and recommendations vie toolt health and effectiveness of current and future u.s. military forces in addition to our gulf war veterans. this is a time for us to say thank you for those who served to say we understand the suffering that gulf war

veteransed are with this illness and we're dedicated to finding higher levels of research to make sure we can relieve their suffering. i yield back the plns of my timeful the chair: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from florida rise? mr. young: mr. chairman, i rise in opposition to the amendment. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. young: mr. chairman, i believe that the gulf war illness program is an important medical research area. the program to which mr. kucinich speaks. but this bill already contains $6.4 million for the program. in addition, in the military construction and veterans' affairs appropriations bill has already appropriated an additional $15 million for the program. the committee has been extremely careful to guarantee that medical research programs were funded at the level that

they could be adequately dealt with as far as the medical researchers are concerned. we believe in the days of having to reduce our budget by $9 billion, we believe that we have adequately funded this program along with the $15 million added by the subcommittee on military construction and the veterans' administration. so i rise in opposition to this amendment. the chair: the gentleman yields back his time? mr. young: i yield back. the chair: the gentleman from washington. mr. dicks: i rise to strike the requisite number of words. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. dicks: i have followed closely ever since the gulf war this issue and i feel that the gentleman has made a very compelling case and i think we should add this money and the justify set is acceptable so i urge a yes vote on the kucinich

amendment and yelled pack my time. the chair: the gentleman from washington yields back. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from ohio. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the noes have it. mr. kucinich: mr. chairman. on that i ask for a recorded vote. the chair: pursuant to clause of of -- 6:00 of rule 18 on the amendment offered by the gentleman from ohio will be postponed. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from texas rise? ms. jackson lee: i have an amendment at the desk noted as 175.

ms. jackson lee: amendment number 69, please. the chair: the clerk will report the amendment. the chair: amendment offered by ms. jackson lee of texas, page

nine, line six, after the dollar amount insert, redeuce by $650,000. page nine, line 13, after the dollar amount, insert, increasedly intrs 30,000. after the dollar amount, insert by -- increase by $500,000. the chair: the gentlewoman from texas is recognized for five minutes. ms. jackson lee: i thank the chairman and want to express my appreciation to mr. young, who is the chairman of the subcommittee and to mr. dicks, the ranking member, for their long years of service. to my colleagues, good news today. when the announcement came that the president of the united states would send the same sympathy letter to families of those soldiers who committed suicide in battle as those who had fallen in different ways in battle.

the reason why that is good news is because the sentence i'm reminded of is that the president and his office indicated that they did not want to stigmatize mental health concerns of our soldiers. i want to pay tribute to the defense appropriations committee for its work on post-traumatic stress disorder and to make note of our late friend, congressman john murtha, who worked with houston on establishing a new post-traumatic stress disorder center. i'm grateful for that. because as all of our states, many of us are facing the large numbers of returning soldiers from both iraq and afghanistan. so i ask for my amendment to be supported to increase research and development funding for post-traumatic stress disorder and traumatic brain injury. that affects our men and women who served selflessly and

bravely in our nation's armed services. my amendment would increase research and development funds for ptsd and t.b.i. for $500,000, would offset general operations and maintenance and activities of the department of defense. i believe this is critical in ensuring our nation's military strength as we move forward the -- toward the 21st century. we obviously were aware of post-traumatic stress in all of our wars. we've seen it every day by our vietnam soldiers. those who came home without welcome. we see it in the numbers of homeless soldiers, many of them vietnam vets. over the years, members of the military and veterans have seen a traumatic increase in the numbers of ptsd and t.b.i. ptsd has risen to 88,719,000 cases in 2010. it's reported that 70% of all

active duty sole crers, 25% of reserve soldiers and 9% of vietnam veterans suffer from ptsd. traumatic brain injuries has increased from $963 -- from 963 in 2000. we know the explosives now used in war cause greater damage or more damage of damage of this kind to our soldiers. also, may of this year, the ninth circuit of the u.s. court of appeals ruled that the u.s. department of veterans affairs is so inadequate that it is unconstitutional. we are grateful for the work that has been done, but this court said many veterans with severe depression or posttraumatic stress disorder are forced to wait weeks for mental health calls and given no opportunity to request or demonstrate their need for expedited care. this is simply unacceptable. the courageous men and women of the armed forces brave i.e.d.'s, attacks, injury and

horrific violence to protect the safety and security of the united states. i was listening to a soldier on the television speak about his injuries and then mentioned the fact that a soldier in front of him, his comrade, his friend, stepped on the i.e.d. but the vast damage of all of those around him, and so we know the collateral damage is as severe as it might be in any other form of mass war. we see the loss of life but we see the injuries are make. we must in turn care for them and when they return home we must make it a priority. as i know this committee has done to increase the resources. members of coping may disagree when it comes to the level of commitment and resources to the united states of foreign wars and conflict. however, we must not allow these debates and discussions to cause us to fail to properly care for these brave soldiers when they return home or when they're injured. i believe in congress and its wisdom, and i believe it is committed to taking care of our

warriors. as a members of the military return to their homes and families, they come without the desire for glory or appreciation. whenever you talk to a vet they are making sure they have the care that they need. increasing amount of resources, however small this amendment offers, helps in specializing, finding ways to better treat and prevent posttraumatic stress disorder and t.b.i. in the first -- and is the first step that congress can add to the work that is already being done. access to posttraumatic stress disorder treatment is especially important since veterans living in such areas that are outside of some of our largest centers are less likely to be diagnosed. we should not wait -- the chair: the gentlewoman's time has expired. ms. jackson lee: i ask colleagues to support the amendment. the chair: who seeks recognition?

mr. young: mr. chairman, i rise in support of the amendment. the chair: the gentleman from florida is recognized. mr. young: mr. chairman, there's no doubt that this is a tremendously important issue, traumatic brain injury is something that we don't even know what the needs are going to be in the future. as our warriors are coming home wounded, full of high spirit and full of morale and full of the fight they would like to go back to if they were able medically and if they could, some of our warriors today don't even know that they have or will be exposed to having traumatic brain injury in the future. it's something we just don't know the answer to. we also know that the medical professionals tell us that they

cannot just use money just to spend it, but they have to use it effectively and they have to use it where it has producing results. but in view of this i think it's important to guarantee that we have an adequate source of funding for this medical research and the treatment of these wounded warriors who suffer with this affliction. and so in view of that i rise in support of the amendment. i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from washington. mr. dicks: i rise in support of the amendment. this is an important -- the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. dicks: i move to strike the requisite number of words. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. dicks: the committee has added $125 million this year and $454 million over the last several years going back to when mr. murtha and i were chairman. so we completely concur that this is an important issue, and the gentlelady has made a very

compelling case. i rise in support and yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from texas. the gentleman from georgia is recognized. do you seek to strike the last word? you're recognized for five minutes. mr. broun: thank you, mr. chairman. i'm a physician and i represent fort gordon, georgia. we have a tremendous amount of soldiers as well as vets from the vietnam era with posttraumatic stress disorder. i'm also in the navy reserve. i was seeing patients earlier today and i saw a lady who was a sailor, an intelligence sailor in afghanistan and she's suffering from posttraumatic stress disorder and all the problems associated with that. at fort gordon, georgia, we're trying to expand the facilities there to treat ptsd, to do the research and development. that's a teaching hospital as well as a hospital that cares

for soldiers. so i applaud my friend from houston's amendment here. it's an extremely important issue we face. we'll face this issue for the next six, seven decades. we can't put as much emphasis as this issue will demand over the next decades. it's an extremely important amendment. i congratulate ms. jackson lee on this amendment, and i rise in support of the amendment. i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back his time. anyone else seek recognition? the question is on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from texas. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. the amendment is agreed to. the gentlewoman from texas. ms. jackson lee: i have an amendment at the desk, amendment number 67. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: --

the chair: the clerk will report the amendment. the clerk: page 9, line 6, after the dollar amount insert reduced by $600 million. after the dollar amount insert increase by $500 million. page 34, line 1, insert after the dollar amount, insert increase by $500,000. the chair: the gentlewoman from texas is recognized for five minutes. ms. jackson lee: let me take a moment since i just followed my amendment to thank mr. young and mr. dicks for seeing an expanded category of individuals suffering from ptsd and accepting my amendment and working with us. i want to thank dr. broun for his service and his direct view of what happens to great americans, soldiers who have sacrificed and they cannot

function because of ptsd. so i am grateful for that. and the reason why i say that, chairman young, and to ranking member dicks, is because many people don't realize the work that the defense appropriations and the pentagon does on a number of health issues. one of them happens to be cancer, and i've heard in coffee clutches, around dinner tables, that cancer is an epidemic. it seems appropriate for the defense department that's been at the cutting edge of technology over the years such as the internet can talk about or be at the lead. so i intend to offer an amendment that i'd like to discuss. i'd like to discuss with mr. young and mr. dicks, but i intend to withdraw, but it is very important. this amendment would increase funding under title 6, defense health programs, by $500,000 in order to fund research related to triple negative breast cancer and will be offset by

reducing the general operations and maintenances and activities of the department of defense. i'm hoping my colleagues will work with me on this, and i hope they'll be remind of a young woman by the name of yolanda yvette williams who was an outstanding medical professional, who fought against this triple third grain cancer and left behind a husband, a mother and two children. it is a specific stream of breast cancer in which no targeted treatment is available. the american cancer association says this is an aggressive subtype with lower survival rate. i offer this amendment to increase funding for research, not to take away moneys from others, but i would certainly like to out of this discussion have this kind of cancer looked upon as we are doing our research to develop a targeted research for the triple

negative breast cancer strain. breast cancers with specific targeted methods such as hormone has a higher survival rate. if i might, mr. dicks, and i'll yield to you just to say a word about yolanda, who was a dedicated member of the good hope baptist church. she was a graduate of texas southern university. she received a number of degrees, a number of the jack and jill, her mother was a medical professional, and she was a chief clinical officer in stafford, texas, having a long history, even though she was very young, of her commitment as a nurse to medical care. this young woman did not have a chance because of this enormous strain that does not have a high survival rate. it is treatment is hormone gene-based strain and as i said

has a difficult time of survival. mr. dicks: will the gentlelady yield? ms. jackson lee: i yield. mr. dicks: i appreciate the sincerity and the gentlelady's commitment to these programs. i have been a supporter of these programs over the years. triple negative breast cancer is a very, very aggressive and difficult type of cancer, and as the department goes throughth work, peer review research, we will bring this up next year in our hearings and ask them what they're doing about this. ms. jackson lee: i appreciate it. let me just say breast cancer counts for one in four cancers among women. in 2011 more than 26 million african-american will be diagnosised with breast cancer. another 6,000 will die. them pacts all women of all backgrounds. i want to make sure that every subset has a seat at the table, chairman young, so no matter

what background, no matter what ethnic background, will not in essence suffer the opportunity for full research. my amendment was $500,000. it is in tribute to the honor and the leadership and the life of yolanda williams. i would like to ask my colleagues here on the appropriations committee to allow me to engage with you and to possibly modify as we go forward language to just say that this money will be available for difficult strains of cancer so that her life will be honored and that we would be able to move forward. with that i will submit the rest of my statement into this record. just concluding by indicated that i had the privilege and honor of ms. williams at her service. i want to offer to her family again, her husband, mother and children my deepest sympathy for this valiant american

woman. with that i know we will work together. i ask unanimous consent to withdraw this amendment, and i yield back. the chair: without objection, the amendment is withdrawn. who seeks recognition? the clerk will read. the clerk: page 10, line 16, operation and maintenance, army reserve. $3,047,330,000. operation and maintenance, navy reserve, $1,323,134,000. operation and maintenance, marine core reserve, $274,443,000. operation and maintenance, air force reserves, $3,310, 459,000. operation and maintenance, army national guard, $6,979,232,000.

operation and maintenance -- the chair: does any member seek recognition? clerk will read. the clerk: page 12, line 18, operation and maintenance, air national guard, $6,094,380,000. united states court of appeals for the armed forces, $13,861,000. environmental restoration, army, $346,431,000. environmental restoration, navy, $308,668,000.

environmental restoration, air force, $525,453,000. environmental restoration, defensewide, $10,716,000. environmental restoration, formerly used defense sites, $276,495,000. overseas humanitarian disaster and civic aid, $107,662,000 to remain available until september 30, 2013. cooperative threat reduction account. $508,219,000 to remain available until september 30, 2014. department of defense acquisition work force development fund, $105,501,000. title 3, procurement, aircraft procurement, army,

$6,487,481,000 to remain available until september 30, 2014. missile procurement, army, $1,464,223,000 to remain available until september 30, 2014. procurement of weapons and track combat vehicles, army, $2,178,186,000 to remain available until september 30, 2014. procurement of ammunition, army, $1,952,000. $1,952,625,000 to remain available until september 30, 2014. other procurement, army. $9,371,952,000. to remain available until september 30, 2014.

aircraft procurement, navy, $17,80 ,750,000 to remain available until september 30, 2014. weapons procurement, navy, $2,975,749,000. to remain available until september 30, 2014. procurement of ammunition, navy and marine corps, $0 -- $633,943,000 to remain available until september 30, 2014. $270,639,000. completion of prior year's shipbuilding program, $73,992,000. in all, $14,725,493,000 to remain available until september 30, 2016.

other procurement, navy. $5,996,459,000 to remain available until september 30, 2014. procurement, marine corps, $1, 453,000 -- $1,453,602,000 to remain available until september 30, 2014. aircraft procurement, air force, $13,987,613,000 to remain available until september 30, 2014. missile procurement, air force. $5,689,998,000 to remain available until september 14 -- september 30, 2014. procurement of ammunition, air force, $522,565,000 to remain

available for obligation until september 30,2014. other procurement, air force, $17,260,619,000 to remain available until september 30, 2014. procurement, defense-wide. $5,046,447,000 to remain available until september 30, 2014. defense production, $29,964,000. title 4, research development tests and evaluation. research development tests and evaluation, army, $9,381,166,000 to remain available until september 30,2013. >> mr. chairman. the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman from georgia rise?

>> i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. will the gentleman from florida specify the number of his amendment. mr. broun: number 30. the chair: the gentleman has 24 and 25. would the gentleman designate which of those amendments. mr. brun: 24, mr. chairman. army environmental. 24. the chair: the clerk wiz designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 24 printed in the congressional record offered by mr. broun of georgia. the chair: the gentleman from georgia is recognized for five minutes. mr. broun: thank you, mr. chairman. this amendment eliminates both the environmental quality technology research count and

the management support set to accompany that research under the department of army sending $25.7 million to the spend regular ducks account. much of the research conducted by the army is of merit and deserves the funding provided. without some of these research programs, we would not have many of the technologies that protect our service members and make them more effective soldiers. however, i do not see the need for the army to conduct research on technologies pertaining to environmental quality. this type of research would be best conducted in a university or in the private sector. asking the army to research something that does not directly coincide with their direct mission is imprudent and these funds would be better used in reducing the burden of debt on our nation. i urge my colleagues to support this amendment. i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from washington rise?

mr. dicks: i rise in opposition to the gentleman's amendment. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. dicks: the army's environmental research program d develops technologies that support the long-term sustainment of army training and testing activities by improving the army's ability to comply with requirements of federal, state and local environmental and health laws and reducing the cost of this compliance. the program develops technologies to decon testimony nate or neutralize, excuse me, army unique hazardous and toxic waste at sites containing waste ammunition, explosives, heavy metals, propellants, chemical knew move in additions and other organic contaminants. this resenl concentrates on technology to avoid the potential for future hazardous waste problems by reducing hazardous waste yen ration but process modify cage and

control, materials recycling and substitution. this program also supports military readiness by developing technologies to predict and mitigate range and maneuver constraints associated with current and emerging weapons systems doctrine and regulations this program supports both d.o.d. environmental stewartship and military requirements. therefore i urge my colleagues to reject the gentleman's amendment. the chair: the gentleman from washington yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from nea rise? mr. young: i rise in opposition to the amendment. the chair: does the gentleman move to strike the last word? mr. young: yes. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. young: mr. chairman, the only budget documents submitted to the committee during our lengthy hearing process, and they were lengthy, stated that funding in the request for this

purpose is to support the long-term sustainment of army trading and testing activities by improving the army's ability to comply with requirements mandated by federal, state, and local environmental laws. in other words, what we're dealing with here is an issue that the military is mandated to comply with. by existing law. we have already -- i said this before, i'm going to say it again, probably numerous times today, we have already reduced the president's budget request for the defense bill for fiscal year 2012 by $9 billion. it wasn't easy. we took a lot of cuts. but we have taken a lot o-- a lot of cuts and i don't think we should take this cut and so

i object and oppose this amendment. i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back his time. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from georgia. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the noes have it. the amendment is not agreed to. mr. chairman. -- >> mr. chairman the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman from fwea rise? mr. broun: i have an amendment at the desk, number 25. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the chair: amendment number 25 printed in the congressional record offered by mr. broun of georgia. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. broun: my amendment zeros out the h.i.v. research reform d.t. -- rdt&e in the department of the army.

again, here we see research being conducted by the military that doesn't focus on the coring my of national security. h.i.v. resedge is being conducted to the tune of -- in my home state of georgia, at the center for disease control, as well as the national institutes of health. it is this type of duplication the american people have tchanded that congress eliminate this may mean agencies and departments coordinating more effectively to share information but we must all work together, more efficiently in the name of reduced spending. i support this amendment and yield back my time. the chair: the gentleman from washington. mr. dicks: i rise in opposition to the gentleman's amendment. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. dicks: h.i.v. poses a threat to military personnel in terms of readiness and force protection and may affect the

ability -- many nation states. places like subsaharan africa and other places are particularly at risk. further reserge is needed to protect u.s. military readiness and decrease treatment costs for the department of defense health infrastructure. the bill provides $24 million above the request, including $8 million in the defense health program and $16 million in research, development, test and evaluation army, related to h.i.v.-aids research this funding will enhance efforts to prevent new h.i.v. infections, develop better tests and dream options for military personnel and health care beneficiaries an provide for a comprehensive program of research and development on preventive h.i.v. vaccines. i urge my colleagues to reject

this amendment and yield pack my time. the chair: the gentleman from washington yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from florida rise? mr. young: i move to strike the last word. the chair: the gentleman is rex niced for five minutes. mr. young: i rise in opposition to the amendment that would eliminate all the funds for the army's military h.i.v. research program. since 1986, the military has recognized the h.i.v. ep democratting as a threat to u.s. and allied forces worldwide. and this program has evalved to become an important international partner in efforts to combat this disease. with over 33 million infections worldwide, h.i.v. poses a significant threat to our own military who are serving our nation throughout the world. additional hi h.i.v. has been identified as a national

security priority in the president's national security strategy since 2002. previous funding for the military h.i.v. research program has helped ensure a safe blood supply for our war fighters. more recently, funding has supported the first vaccine clinical trial which showed a reduction in the risk of h.i.v. infections to humans. this funding for the military h.i.v. research program will continue to support the development of an h.i.v. vaccine, ensure accurate h.i.v. testing for the army, track the presence of h.i.v. in the military production and assess the risk of h.i.v. exposure to u.s. allied forces deployed overseas. this amendment would eliminate the $22.8 million of funds for the army's program, would

eliminate all the money for this very important program. so i must oppose the amendment. i yield back my time. the chair: the gentleman from florida yields back. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from georgia. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the noes have it. the amendment is not agreed. the clerk will continue. does any member seek recognition? the clerk will read. the clerk: research, development, test and development, navy -- to remain available until september 30, 2013. the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman from georgia rise? mr. broun: mr. chairman, i have an amendment at the desk, it's number 26. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment.

the clerk: amendment number 26 printed in the congressional record offered by mr. broun of georgia. the chair: the gentleman from georgia is recognized for five minutes. mr. broun: thank you, mr. chairman. it eliminates the environmental protection research under the department of navy sending $27.7 million to the spending reduction account. again, we see research being conducted that is not directly related to the armed forces mission which could and should be conducted elsewhere. currently, the department of energy, e.p.a., the department of interior and nasa are all conducting similar environmental protection research, like the department of defense. this is yet another example of the duplicative programs conducted duplicative research. instead, let's free up technologies that fulfill their constitutional obligation of providing for the common defense of our nation and its citizens while decreasing

unnecessary spending. i urge support of this amendment, and i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman from georgia yields back his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from washington rise? mr. dicks: i rise in opposition to the gentleman's amendment. the chair: the gentleman from washington is recognized for five minutes. mr. dicks: many environmental laws, regulations and policies impose restrictions on navy vessels, aircraft and facility that would impede navy operations if not met. the navy must be able to conduct its national security mission in compliance with applicable environmental requirement in the u.s. and a-- requirements in the u.s. and abroad while simultaneously minimizing the cost of compliance. this program develops and evalue waits processes, hardware, systems and operational procedures which allow the navy to operate in u.s., foreign and international waters, airspace and land areas while complying with environmental laws,

regulations, executive orders, policies and international agreements. project funded in this program support navy compliance with the clean water act, the act to prevent pollution from ships, the international convention for the prevention of pollution from ships and numerous others. i come from an area where the navy operates very effectively in the state of washington, and these kinds of onboard waste disposal are absolutely critical because when you have a nuclear submarine you're out there for many, many days and you got to have things onboard ship as well to deal with these kinds of problems. so i think this is in the best interest of the country, and i urge a no on the gentleman's amendment. i yield back my time. the chair: the gentleman from washington yields back his time. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from georgia. those in favor say aye.

those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the noes have it. the amendment is not agreed to. for what purpose does the gentleman from georgia rise? mr. broun: mr. chairman, i have an amendment at the desk, it's number 1. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 21 printed in the congressional record offered by mr. broun of georgia. the chair: the gentleman from georgia is recognized for five minutes. mr. broun: thank you, mr. chairman. mr. chairman, my amendment would eliminate the navy's funding for nato research and development and transfer $9.1 million to the varle cooperative program. -- the israeli cooperative program. the secretary of defense has went on record stating, and i quote, the nato alliance has been used by many european nations for the means to subsidize their own spending with u.s. taxpayer money. unquote. i cannot agree more with the

secretary. many members of nato refuse to bear their share of the cost and risk. essentially, mr. chairman, we should invest our valuable research into an ally who is willing to pull their weight and take their fight to the enemy. the israeli cooperative program is a ballistic missile program to ensure the capability of our two missile defense programs. mr. chairman, we've never had a greater need for missile defense, not only in this nation, but in the middle east with our great ally, israel. we have no great ally in the middle east than israel and our research programs should reflect our commitment to those allies who stand ready and willing to partner with us to protect our mutual interest. and this would strengthen that

mutual interest and strengthen that partnership. mr. clarme, i urge support of -- mr. chairman, i urge support of this amendment and i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman from georgia yields back his time. the gentleman from washington, for what purpose does the gentleman rise? mr. dicks: i rise in opposition to the gentleman's amendment. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. dicks: nato funding in this bill should not be curtailed because the u.s. and the nato nations are one another's closest partners, and the nato alliance has been a vital and successful part of u.s. foreign policy dating back to its formation in 1949. while the alliance must evolve in light of changelinging world events, there is no -- changing world events, there is no practical option. for all nato nations, the alliance allows for security capabilities and a structure to control operations that the allies on their own could not afford to maintain. active participation, nato also

allows u.s. to pursue defenses against emerging threats such as implementation of improved missile defense capabilities. to maintain its commitment to nato, the u.s. must continue to contribute funding to nato programs. i urge my colleagues to vote no on this amendment, and i yield back my time. the chair: the gentleman from washington yeemeds back his time. -- yields back his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from florida rise? mr. young: mr. chairman, i move to strike the last word. the chair: the gentleman from florida is recognized for five minutes. mr. young: mr. chairman, i rise in opposition to this amendment. nato has been a very, very important part of keeping peace in the world. there might be some changes necessary in nato as we see the world unfold and the world develop differently, maybe so, but it should not be done in a hit or miss, helter-skelter way. mr. dicks and i as leaders of the appropriations subcommittee

has already had several lengthy meetings on this subject, and we have agreed that following completion of this fiscal year's defense appropriations bill we plan to hold hearings and look thoroughly into what we see the role of nato today, tomorrow and next year. but in the meantime, it's important that we don't do any serious damage to nato which is probably one of the most effective international organizations at maintaining peace that we have in the world. so i must object to these -- to the gentleman's amendment. i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from georgia. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the noes have it. the gentleman from georgia. mr. broun: i request the yeas and nays. the chair: pursuant to clause 6 of rule 18, further proceedings on the amendment offered by offered by the gentleman from

georgia will be postponed. the clerk will read. the clerk: page 31, line 1, research, development, test and evaluation, air force. the chair: the clerk will suspend. the clerk: $26,313,196,000 to remain available until september 30, 2013. the chair: the gentleman from vermont. mr. welch: thank you, mr. speaker. our amendment -- the chair: does the gentleman have an amendment? mr. welch: i'm sorry. thank you, mr. speaker. i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will report the amendment. the clerk: amendment offered by mr. welch of vermont. page 31, line 6, offer the dollar amount insert reduced by $29023,000. after the dollar amount, insert increase by $297,023,000. the chair: the gentleman from vermont is recognized for five minutes.

mr. welch: thank you very much, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, as you know, to govern is to choose. to write a budget is where governing makes choices. my amendment raises the question as to whether or not spending $297 million for research in the next generation of fighter is the right choice to make at this time. little bit of back groupped -- -- background. mr. dicks: will the gentleman yield? mr. welch: yes. mr. dicks: it's not a fighter. it's a bomber. mr. welch: i thank the gentleman. the next generation of bomber. is that the right choice? and here's the question, number one, it may be desirable but is it affordable? the office of management and budget did not include this as a recommendation in the budget nor did the president who's

charged more than anyone else in this country with our national defense. we have the right as a congress and the constitutional responsibility to make our own judgments. mr. dicks does a great job at that as does mr. young, but we have to ask the question as to whether or not when our office of management budget, our house armed services committee both say that the current fleet of bombers, bombers, mr. dicks, is functioning very well, can we afford at this time $297 million for additional research? now, the question is, it may be desirable but is it affordable when we have this horrendous budget squeeze that we know is dividing this congress because we have to make some very tough choices in the future? the second question that comes up is whether something that may be desirable comes at a cost that is unacceptable.

now, the defense budget is large and necessarily so, but it is the one item of spending that's been exempt from cuts. the environmental protection agency is going to be down 15%. nasa down 10%. yet, the spending increase in the pentagon is going to be substantial despite the enormous budget pressures in this ongoing, very serious debate that we're having about revenues and taxes that embrace both sides of the aisle. the third question is, if it's necessary, is there some burden on those who have the responsibility of overseeing taxpayer dollars in the defense budget to poke around and find that $300 million somewhere else in a nearly $700 billion budget? so those are the questions. it's not a direct assertion that we must suspend forever research on the next generation of bombers, but it is asking

those questions in this time, just because something's desirable, does it make it affordable? if it's desirable, at what cost does it come? and if it's necessary, are there other places in a $700 billion budget that we can find this $300 million to do research that will allow us to proceed? and that's what this amendment asks. it says tough choices for america have to begin here and they have to include tough choices within the pentagon budget. i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman may not reserve. does the gentleman yield back his time? mr. welch: pardon me. the chair: the gentleman may not reserve. does he yield back? mr. welch: i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from washington rise? mr. dicks: i rise in very strong opposition to the gentleman's amendment. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. dicks: first of all, i have to again correct the record

here that the president of the united states, o.m.b., defense department, requested $197 million. our committee held hearings with the air force and found from a lot of dialogue with the three companies that are competing that we might be able to accelerate this bomber remacement program if we could get -- replacement program if we could get an additional $197 million. we added $100 million to that because we see that this program is vitally important. now, i led the fight many years ago in the house on the b-2 bomber. my colleagues got tired of listening to me on that. we started the program with 125 bombers and ened up with 20. so we need another stealth bomber which can reach around the world as we have seen the

b-2 do just recently and so this is a very high priority of the air force. next to tankers, the replacement of the bomber is going to -- along with the joint strike fighter are going to be the top priorities for the air force. so this would be a catastrophic blow to terminate this program and though i have the greatest respect for the gentleman from vermont, i would say that i would stay with the committee which unanimously supported this program, has always supported modernization of stratenalic bombers and strategic mod erpsage of submarines, two of the major issues our committee is dealing with. so again, i urge a no vote on this amendment. the chair: the gentleman yields back his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from florida rise? mr. young: i rise to strike the

last word. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. young: mr. chairman, i rise in strong opposition to this amendment. i suggest maryland times i would not do anything or support any bill that affected our soldiers or affected our readiness. this bomber is the wrong time off because it takes a while to develop a new bomber because of the nature of that vehicle. by the time it gets online, we are going to need the new bomber because the old bombers are going to be old. without going into all the detail that mr. dicks did, an he did a very good job ex-plaining detail why this new bomber is needed, let me relate a story that happened to me as a freshman and a member of the armed services committee after

a lengthy hearing with the united states marine corps. this very, very distinguished, very powerful looking and appearing marine came to me after the hearing and he said, listen son, he called me son in those days, he said, listen, son, we marines will go anywhere to fight any war our country sends us to. we'll fight on the beach, we'll fight on the sea, we'll fight in the junglering just promise me as a member of congress you'll make sure that any airplane that flies over that battlefield is an american airplane. and you can certainly understand why the troop on the battlefield would want that to be the case. why he would want that bomber

flying over to be an merge, why he would want that fighter to be american, why he would want that strike fighter flying over the battlefield to be american. if it -- it just makes good common sense that if you're sending troops to war, make sure that the airplanes that ply over the battlefield belong to us, not the enemy. again, i strongly oppose this amendment and yield back my time. the chair: the gentleman yields back. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from vermont. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the noes have it. the gentleman from vermont. mr. welch: i request a recorded vote. the chair: pursuant to clause 6 of rule 18, further proceedings on the amendment by the gentleman from vermont will be postponed. the gentleman from georgia. >> i have an amendment at the desk, number 22. the chair: the clerk will dez

igthate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 22, printed in the congressional record, offered by mr. broun of georgia. the chair: the gentleman from georgia is recognized for five mins. mr. broun: this amendment is nearly identical to the amendment that transfers naval rate to israeli defense. this takes the money out of the nato r brand d fund and places the funds that the israeli cooperative program where israel and the writs are cooperating to develop a missile defense system that will help them as well as help us. we must stand by israel now and always. my amendment makes a positive step toward growing our relationship and solidifying security in the middle east. it will help israel and help the united states also. i urge my colleagues to support

my amendment and i ceil back. the chair: the gentleman from georgia yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from washington rise? mr. dicks: i rise in opposition to the gentleman's amendment. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. dicks: nato funding in this bill should not be curtailed because the united states and nato nations are the closest partners. nato has been a successful part of u.s. foreign policy back to the formation in 1949 during the truman administration. while the alliance must involve changing world events, there is no other practical opings for cooperation with our european allies. for all nato nations, the alliance allows for security capabilities and a structure to control operations that the allies on their own could not afford or maintain. active participation in nato

allows them to pursue defenses such as improved missile defense capabilities. to maintain its commitment to nato, the united states must continue its contribution to all aspect os they have nato program, including research and development activities. i urge my colleagues to vote no on this amendment. the chair: does the gentleman yields pack? mr. dicks: i yield back. the chair: for what purposes does the gentleman rise? >> i move to strike the last word. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. >> i associate myself with the rashes of the ranking member from washington state in opposing this bill. nato is a strong ally. we have a mull pl year generational commitment to nato. we do a lot of joint projects, a lot of research and development that's quointly developed and we need their support and they need our support and i rise in opposition to mr. broun's

amendment. i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman rise? >> strike the last word. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. >> mr. speaker, i rise in support of this easm i think it's a good ream offered by the gentleman from georgia. while i concur with the distinguished chairman of the committee and the words of the ranking member of the committee and the early wards of the -- words of the chairman about how important nato is, the fact of the matter is, as defense secretary gates told us a couple of weeks ago, the european members of nato are not pulling their weight. they're not spening the kind of money we're spending, they're not spending the kind of money that israel is spending on their own defense, they not putting in much effort at all. we're carrying the burden. the fact of the matter is, as weaver seeing in libya, where they're running out of ammunition after two weekings of tighting with a nothing power, nato and the european

allies are not spending money, they're relying on us to do it. the fact of the matter is that israel is spending 7.5% of g.d.p. on the mill tear, she has to, because she's the object of the iranians an others who want to destroy her. an we are getting our money's worth because israel's technical expertise in anti-missile defenses is feeding back to us. so switching these funds from nato to israel would benefit the united states in terms of anti-missile technology. would benefit israel and they give a little more weight to secretary gates' words when he says to the european member of nato that if they want to pull their weight they ought to start pull manager weight instead of spending under 2% of g.d.p. and if the want to be

allies of the united states, it can't be a one-way alliance. this amendment will help israel, will help us, will help the cause of opposing terrorism yield back the balance of my timely andsen a mess am to the european allies, maybe you're going to start thinking, if you're going to pull your weight in nato, pull your weight in nato. mr. broun: would the gentleman yields? mr.ed in a der: yes, i'll yield. mr. brun: thank you, an thank you for your support of this amendment. iran is developing immediate yalm and long-range missile technology as well as nuclear development. we've never needed this kind of contract to prevent not only a missile attack or further missile attacks which they get every day, but eneed for our own defense to put more money into this instead of supporting nato. i thank the gentleman for yielding. i think this is extremely rt

important that we plus up this missile defense research, for israel an for our own selves an i thank the gentleman for supporting the amendment. mr. nadler: i'll just sum up. it helps them, it helps the united states an it sends a message to the european allies into saying, maybe we should put some work into nato, which they haven't been doing recently. let's get them to start making a little effort and send them a message here. i support the jell's amendment. -- amendment. i yield back. the chair: the gentleman from fork yields back. the question son the option of the amendment offered by the gentleman of georgia. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the noes visit, the amendment is not agreed to. >> mr. chairman, i ask for a recorded vote. the chair: pursuant to clause 6 of rule , further proceedings

on the amendment offered by the gentleman from georgia will be postponed. >> i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: clerk will read the -- the chair: clerk will read. the clerk: page 31, line 8, research development test and evaluation defense wide. $19,324,865,000 to remain available until september 30, 2013.

the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman rise? mr. frelinghuysen: strike the last word. the chair: does the gentleman have an amendment at the desk in mr. free ling d mr. stearns: i have an amendment at the deskful the chair: the clerk will report the amendment. the clerk: page 34, line 1 after the collar amount insert increase by $16 million. the chair: the gentleman from florida is recognized for five minutes. mr. stearns: thank you, mr. chairman. s that very simple amendment. basically, i am taking $16 million, not billion, $16 million from part of the department of defense budget which is called defense-wide appropriations. there's almost $20 billion. so i'm asking to take roughly .008, or .8% from this

defense-wide appropriations which is used for other than military departments. not even alickable to the army, navy, air force, but it's used by the sec retear of defense for the maintenance, lease and operation of facilities and congresswomen. what i'm doing is taking this and transferring it to the peer review prostate cancer research program. funding levels for this program has gone down dramatically since 2001. right now it's funded at $64 million. it was funded in 2001 at $100 million. it's continually come down and down and down. i'm not asking you to take it up to the 2001 level. i'm just asking you to take it up to perhaps what it was in 2005. i think without going into details, this is a very wise move because funding levels for this program has decreased yet prostate cancer is the second leading cause of male

cancer-related deaths in the united states with an estimated $170,316 casualties last year. there are no noticeable symptoms in early stages. testing has led to detection of nine of 10 cases. that's why this paltry amount would be better spent for prostate cancer resedge for our military than abod. according to the prostate research program, active duty males are twice as likely to develop prostate cancer as their civilian counterparts. research funded by the pcrp, soldiers exposed to chemical agents such as agent orange and those exposed to depleted uranium. congress has skiptly supporting funding levels of over $80 million annually for this important ost an it's only funded at $60 million.

the pcrp funds are innovative, high risk and supporting interdisciplinary group settings. it allows research to move faster an faster and allow them to be able to apply for munding -- funding from the national institutes of hell. unlike any other medical program, the review panels are made up of the country's top researchers and prostate cancer senior vivors making sure that innovative ideas rapidly benefit all men and those burdened by this disease. in 2010, they helped shepherd two new drugs through clinical trials. it is both to prolong a man's life who has prostate cancer. they move through the clinical trials process and has made it to the bedside of men's dying

from prostate cancer. it will increase productivity of governmently funded and privately funded medical research. i ask my colleagues to support the amendment to transfer there are 16 million from defensewide appropriation which is other than military which they use it presently for maintenance. it represents a .08% reduction in this otherwise militarywide funding. i ask unanimous consent that the letter to me from the department of defense prostate cancer remp program and the prostate cancer foundation be part of the question. the chair: without objection. the gentleman's request will be covered by general leave. mr. stearns: and i yield back. the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman from new jersey rise?

>> i move to strike the last word. the chair: is the gentleman opposed to the amendment? the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. frelinghuysen: to speak in favor of the amendment. i've been very much involved in peer reviewed prostate cancer research in my home state and certainly made a commitment to that community to support additional funds and we're willing to accept the -- mr. dicks: will the gentleman yield? i am so thrilled that i have an amendment that the gentleman from florida has an amendment that i can support. i join with you and urge everyone to support the gentleman's amendment. mr. stearns: i thank the gentleman. all the time given on the amendment which he has very little time to look at. again, this happened and i'm pleased he's supporting this amendment. obviously i will not call for a vote and appreciate the appropriators supporting my

amendment. mr. dicks: i yield back. the chair: the gentleman from new jersey yields back. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from florida. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. the amendment is agreed to. for what purpose does the gentleman from texas rise? >> i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will report the amendment. the clerk: page 31, line 17, after the dollar amount, insert reduced by $13 million. after the dollar amount insert increase by $10 million. page 34, line 1, after the dollar amount insert increase by $10 million. the chair: the gentleman from texas is recognized for five minutes. mr. sessions: thank you, mr. chairman, mr. chairman, first, i'd like to recognize, if i can, the gentleman, c.w. "bill" young, who is a stalwart to the men and women of this congress and the men and women of the

military to make sure that they not only have what they need but also make sure they get money well spent on behalf of taxpayers. also, i'd like to thank chairman hal rogers and certainly the gentleman from washington, norm dicks, for their hard work and dedication to trying to work on traumatic brain injury known as t.b.i. and also posttraumatic stress disorder, ptsd. and to thank all three of them and others in this congress for their continued support by increasing funding for t.b.i. and ptsd in this overall bill by $125 million. while i understand the long-standing practice of the committee for not designating specific t.b.i. funds, my amendment confirms the house's support for this amendment which i have offered many times and certainly related to t.b.i. in may of this year to the national defense authorization act of 2007.

>> will the gentleman yield? mr. sessions: i would yield. mr. dicks: explain to me the $10 million would not be part of the government program, that this would give people with traumatic brain injury, posttraumatic stress disorder an option to go to the private sector? mr. sessions: in fact, that is correct. what has previously been in the defense armed services committee, the policy that would allow men and women of the military who have t.b.i. to be able to take these funds and be able to use them outside of the department of defense to what i would call private -- mr. dicks: what about tricare, which is a private company? mr. sessions: they can choose to not where they are designated to go to by the department of defense, that would be correct. mr. dicks: thank you for yielding. mr. sessions: on may 26 and 27 during the debate the house

unanimously adopted an amendment to create a pilot program administered by the department of defense that would begin treating our troops coming back home from theater with t.b.i. and ptsd. today, congress has the opportunity to appropriate funds that would be used to treat our active duty and veterans suffering from t.b.i. and ptsd. my amendment specifically moves $10 million from the more than $19 billion in research, development, test and evaluation of the program to increase the test program by $10 million, once again. this money will assist directly to these soldiers and others in the military who have t.b.i.-related injuries to be able to go to private sector facilities with the utilization of taxpayer dollars for them to get leading edge treatments on these issues. in april, 2007, the department

of veterans affairs screened veterans who were serving in iraq and afghanistan since october, 2001, for symptoms associated with t.b.i. more than 19% of these veterans screened positive for t.b.i. symptoms. this is a big issue. according to the u.s. army, the number of soldiers leaving active duty service has increased 64% from 2005 to 2009 due to brain health. whether it was t.b.i., ptsd or a mental illness. a 2009 rand study says that costs related to depression, ptsd and t.b.i. from our soldiers ranges from $4 billion over a two-year period of time. today, health care providers all over this country are treating -- health care people are treating brain injury patients with new and innovative treatment with

remarkable result. unfortunately, -- remarkable results. unfortunately, many of these treatments are not available for our heroes that i have previously discussed who are suffering from t.b.i. our troops put their lives on the line every day and i think they need the opportunity to receive this treatment that is available for their recovery. this pilot will provide for that treatment and recovery. as has been talked about here on the floor of the house of representatives, $10 million out of $19 billion should be allocated to this. i appreciate all of my colleagues not only learning more about this issue, wanting to be part of how we can help these men and women making groundbreaking treatments for our nation's veterans and active duty soldiers. i thank you, mr. chairman. i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from new jersey. >> i move to strike the last

word. we commend the gentleman -- the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. the gentleman from new jersey is recognized for five minutes. kix diction will the gentleman yield? mr. frelinghuysen: yes. mr. dicks: we accept the amendment too. mr. frelinghuysen: yield back. the chair: any other member wishing to speak on the amendment? if not, the amendment offered by the gentleman from texas. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. the ayes have and the amendment is agreed to. the clerk will read. the clerk: page 31, line 19. operational tests and evaluation defense, $191,292,000. to remain available until september 30, 2013. title 5, revolving and management funds, defense working capital funds,

$1,575,010,000. national defense sealess fund $1,100,519,000. title 6, our department of defense programs, defense health program, $32,317,459,000. of which $16,920,000,000 be available for contracts under the tricare program. $632,518,000 to remain available until september 30, 2014 for procurement. $1,187,206,000 available until september 30,2013 for research. chemical agents, ammunitions destruction defense, $1,554,422,000. of which $401,768,000 shall be

only for the assembled chemical weapons alternatives program. drug interdiction and counterdrug activities defense, $1,208,147,000. joint improvised explosive defeat fund, $220,406,000 to be available until september 30, 2014. officer of the inspector general, $346,919,000. title 7, related agencies, central intelligence agency retirement and disabilities system fund, $513,700,000. intelligence community management account $54,218,000.

title 8, general provisions. section 8001, no part of any appropriation shall be used for publicity not authorized by the congress. section 8002, provisions of law prohibiting the payment of compensation to any person not a citizen of the united states shall not apply to personnel of the department of defense. section 8003, no part of any appropriations shall remain available for obligation unless expressly provided herein. section 8004, no more than 20% of the appropriations are limited for obligation during the current fiscal year shall be obligated during the last two months of the fiscal year. section 8005, the secretary may transfer -- may transfer not to exceed $4 billion of working capital funds. section 8006, with regard to specific programs in tables

titled explanation of project level adjustments the obligation of amounts appropriated for which the amounts appropriated exceed the amount requested are hereby required to be carried out in the manner required by such tables. section 8007, the department shall submit a report to establish the baseline for application of reprogramming. section 8008, cash balances and working capital funds may be maintained in such amounts as are necessary for cash dispersements. section 8009, funds appropriated may not be used to have special access program without prior notification 30 calendar days in advance. section 8010, none of the funds may be used to initiate a multiyear contract that quantity tif procurement in excess of $20 million in any one year or a contract for

advancement -- for advanced procurement leading to a multiyear contract that employs economic order quantity procurement in excess of $20 million unless congressional defense committees have been notified at least 30 days in advance. funds appropriated in title 3 of this act may be used for a multiyear procurement contract as follows -- u.h.-60-m -- 60-m helicopter air frames and mh machine mission avionics and cockpits. funds appropriated for operation and maintenance are hereby appropriated for humanitarian and civic assistance. section 8012, during fiscal year 2012, the civilian personnel of the department may not be managed on the basis of any end strength. the 2013 budget request for the

department shall be prepared and submitted to congress. nothing in this section shall apply to military civilian technicians. section 8013, none of the funds shall be used to influential congressional action on legislation. section 8014, none of the funds shall be available for the basic pay and allowances of any member of the army participating as a full time student. section 8015, none of the funds shall be available to contractor performance and activity of the department that is performed by the department. the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman from michigan rise? >> i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk shall designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 46 printed in the congressional record offered by mr. amash of michigan. the chair: the clerk will suspend the reading.

and will the gentleman suspend the number of his amendment? specify the amendment. mr. amash: amendment 62. the chair: the clerk will designate. the clerk: amendment number 62 presented by mr. amash of michigan. the chair: the gentleman from michigan. mr. amash: thank you, madam chair. within the last month the house has voted to strike problematic and anticompetitive a-76 language from h.r. 2017, the department of homeland security appropriations bill, and from h.r. 2112, the agriculture appropriations bill. the same change and reversal of bad policy shall be adopted in this legislation by striking section 8015. my amendment does just that. as drafted section 8015 prohibits the department of defense from contracting out any function unless will it -- it will save a minimum of 10% of the department's performance cost. even if the contractor is less costly overall and can perform the work more efficiently. independent studies have found

that public-private competition lower costs by between 10% and 40%. regardless of whether the competition is won by a private contractor or the government. rather than stand in the way of public-private competitions, congress should cut the red tape and make the use of this cost saving process easier, not harder. the requirements in section 8015 are largely codified in existing statute. retaining section 8015 will obstruct and potentially nullify any current efforts to reform the system in ways that improve public-private competitions and bring much-needed consistency and reliability to the process. instead of complicating the use of competitions that improve service and lower costs, we should be encouraging the agencies to find the most efficient way to deliver services. this amendment will send ma message by reducing restrictions on the department of defense and making it easier to achieve reforms that will increase the availability of cost-saving competitions throughout the department. i urge my colleagues to support

this commonsense taxpayer first first amendment. thank you. i yield back. the chair: the gentleman from michigan yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from washington. mr. dicks: i rise in opposition to the gentleman's amendment. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. dicks: this amendment would repeal section 8015 of the bill which in various forms has been included in the bill for the past 14 years. this section requires that before work is contracted out the department of defense must conduct a formal cost comparison to determine whether privatization would actually save money. the section also provides an exemption to ease contracting with businesses owned by disadvantaged persons, qualified nonprofit entities for disadvantaged persons or businesses owned by native americans. in cases where outsourcing is

appropriate, one of the fundamental reasons would be lowering government operating cost, requiring the d.o.d. actually conduct this analysis under the i think it's a-76 review is reasonable and should be included in this bill. i urge my colleagues to reject this amendment and i must say, we have done these a-76 reviews across the country and many times we find that the government entity reorganizes itself and can actually do the work at a lesser cost than the private sector. the other problem with this whole thing is once the private sector gets it, the costs go right through the roof. so you need to have analysis done after contracting out is done to make sure that you're not getting ripped off. so i strongly oppose the gentleman's amendment. i yield back the balance of my time.

the chair: any further discussion on the gentleman's amendment from michigan? if not, the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from michigan. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. the amendment is agreed to. the gentleman from washington. mr. dicks: i ask for a recorded vote. the chair: a recorded vote is requested and pursuant to clause 6 of rule 18, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from michigan will be postponed. the clerk will read. the clerk: page 51, line 9, section 8016, funds appropriated for the department pilot mentor protege program may be transferred to any other appropriation contained in this act for the purpose of implementing a mentor protege program. section 8017, none of the funds may be available for the purchase of welded ship chain unless manufactured in the united states.

section 8018, none of the funds may be used to demilitarize m-1 carbines or destroy small arms ammunition or ammunition components that are not otherwise prohibited from commercial sale. unless certified by the secretary of the army as serviceable -- as unserviceable or unsafe for further use. section 8019, no more than $500,000 shall be used during a single fiscal year for any single relocation of an organization or function of the department into or within the national capital region. section 8012, in addition $15 million is appropriated for incentive payments authorized by section 504 of the indian financing act of 1974. section 8021, funds by this act for the defense media activity shall not be used for any political activities. section 8022, the department is

authorized to incur obligations not to exceed $350 million for purposes specified in section 2350-jc of title 10 united states code. section 8023, funds made available in this act not less than $30,945,000 shall be available for the civil air patrol corporation. the secretary of the air force shad waive reimbursement for any funds used by the civil air patrol for counterdrug activities. section 8024, none of the funds are available to establish a new department of defense, federally funded research and development center as a new entity, a separate entity. no member of a board of directors or any similar entity of a defense, sfrdc, may be compensated for his or her serviced as a member of such entity. none of the funds to the

department from any source may be used by a defense ffrdc for construction of new plgs. the funds available to the -- buildings. the funds available to the department may be for defense ffrdc's. the secretary shall submit a report presenting the civic amounts of staff years of technical effort. the toal amount appropriated for ffrdc's is reduced by $125 million. section 8025, none of the funds value be used to procure carbon or armor steel plate which were not melted in the united states or canada. section 8026, the term congressional defense committees means the armed services committee of the house, the armed services committee of the senate. section 8027, the department may acquire the modification and repair of aircraft through competition between the department of defense depot

maintenance activities and private firms. section 8021 -- 8028, if the secretary or after consultation with the united states trade representative determines that a foreign country has violated terms of the agreement against certain products produced in the united states, the secretary shall rescind the secretary's blanket waiver of the buy american act. the chair: the clerk will suspend. for what purpose does the gentlelady from ohio rise? >> i have an amendment at desk. the chair: the clerk will report the amendment. the clerk: report offered by mrs. subject of ohio. insert after the period, -- ms. sutton of ohio. insert after the period, such report shall indicate whether reports of items are available for purchase in the united states. the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman from florida rise? >> i reserve a point of order on the gentlelady's amendment. the chair: point of order is reserved by the gentleman from florida.

the gentlelady from ohio is recognized. ms. sutton: thank you, madam speaker. i rise today to shine a light on how america is spending defense dollars. this week we will vote on a $530 billion defense budget. some of that money will go towards pay for our soldiers, some of that money will go towards ensuring military families are cared for. but when it comes to buying everything from building materials to fighter jets, as much of that money as possible should go towards buying american. every dollar we spend on a part or a piece of equipment manufactured overseas when we can easily build it at home is doing our men and women in uniform and our manufacturing base a disservice. this is a clarifying amendment that will increase transparency within the department of defense by having the department indicate whether parts purchased overseas are available here in the united states. taxpayers deserve to know where

their defense dollars are going. they want to see their taxpayer dollars used to purchase quality products and materials produced right here in the united states by american workers. and when that doesn't happen they want and deserve to know why. currently the department of defense is granting tens of thousands of waivers to allow for taxpayer dollars to buy equipment made overseas. if our tax dollars are going to buy a part made overseas, taxpayers deserve to know if that part is available in michigan or ohio or anywhere else in the united states. my amendment simply uses the current department of defense data and the requirements set forth in this section and adds more transparency by highlighting areas where our government is sending money overseas instead of keeping it at home. if we are truly to put americans back to work, we must make sure that congress is doing everything it can towards that end.

this amendment is one small step that we can take right now. this clarifying amendment will only serve to shine a light on taxpayer dollars being invested in the wrong place and show where those funds can be diverted in a way that can make a difference for jobs here at home. i encourage my colleagues to pass this commonsense clarifying amendment to ensure increased transparency for american taxpayers and encourage our department of defense to buy american because that is what taxpayers want and that is what american workers deserve. and i yield back. the chair: the gentlelady from ohio yields back the balance of her time. does the gentleman continue to reserve his point of order. mr. young: i make a point of order against the amendment because it proposes to change existing law and constitute legislation in an appropriations bill. therefore it vie -- therefore violating clause 2 of rule 21. the rule stapets in pertinent part and the -- states in part,

an amendment shall not be in order if exchanging existing law. this amendment imposes additional duties and i ask for a ruling from the chair. the chair: any other member wish to speak to the point of order? the gentlelady from ohio. ms. sutton: thank you, madam speaker. i rise in opposition to the point of order. this is simply a clarifying amendment. it clarifies information that's already being gathered in this section. since 2007 congress has mandated that the department of defense begin tracking waivers that allow the department to buy products from overseas. currently the -- to qualify for a waiver, the buy -- from the buy america requirements, the department of defense has to comply with one of eight criteria. one of those criteria is proving that there's no domestic product available. this section of the bill already requires the department of defense to report back to congress on the amount of their purchases from foreign entities and the dollar value of items for which the buy america act

was waived. my amendment simply uses the current department of defense data and the requirement set forth in this section and adds more transparency by highlighting areas where our government is sending money overseas instead of keeping it at home. as i said, if we are truly to put americans back to work we must make sure that congress is doing everything it can towards that end. it would seem a shame for this objection to stand to an amendment that just ensures transparency and something that's already being used to gather information and i yield back. the chair: the gentlelady yields back. the gentleman from florida makes a point of order that the amendment constitutes legislation in violation of clause 2 of rule 21. section 8028 of the bill constitutes legislation. it has being permitted to remain in the bill by any -- by way of a waiver of that point of order and under the

precedent it may be modified by a germane amendment as long as the amendment does not contain additional legislation. the amendment modifies the report in section 8028-b of the bill. it requires the inclusion and the report of certain information regarding domestic availability of certain products by requiring additional detail in the report. the amendment proposes additional legislation and it therefore violates clause 2 of rule 21 and the point of order is sustained. the gentleman from florida. mr. young: madam chairman, i move to strike the last word. the chair: the gentleman from florida is recognized for five minutes. mr. young: madam chairman, i do so to make this announcement that there are a number of points of order lying on amendments that we will be considering shortly. it will be my hope that we can reserve the point of order so that the member propounding the amendment can also have their five minutes to explain the amendment. and as long as that courtesy is

not abused, i will continue to allow that. but if it does appear to be abused then we will raise the point of order immediately. the chair: the gentleman yields back. the clerk will read. the clerk: page 60, line 1, the secretary shall submit a report on the amount of department purchases from foreign entities. the term by america act means chapter 83 of title 41, united states code. section 8029, amounts contained in the department of defense overseas military facility investment recovery account shall be available until expended for the payments specified by section 2922-c-2 of that act. section 8030, the secretary of the air force may convey without consideration two indian tribes located in nevada, idaho, north dakota, south dakota, montana, oregon,

minnesota, washington relocateable military housing at grant forks air force base that are excess to the needs of the air force. the secretary of the air force shall convey military housing units under subsection a. the operation of walking shield programs shall be -- shall resolve any conflicts among requests of indian tribes for housing units. indian tribe means any recognized indian tribe included on the current list published by the secretary of the interior. section 8031, appropriations for operation and maintenance may be used to purchase items of not more than $250,000. section 8032, none of the funds available to the department of defense working capital funds shall be used for the purchase of an investment item for the purpose of acquiring a new inventory item if shutch an item would not have been chargeable to the department of

defense business operations fund. the fiscal year 2013 budget request for the department shall be prepared and submitted to the congress on the basis that any equipment which was classified as an end item shall be budgeted for in the procurement and not for the supply management business area. section 8033, none of the funds for programs of the central intelligence agency shall remain available for obligation beyond the current fiscal year. section 8034, funds made available in this act for the defense intelligence agency may be used for the design and deployment of general defense intelligence program and intelligence communications. section 8035, none of the funds under the heading "operation and maintenance defensewide" not less than $12 million shall be made available for the

mitigation of environmental impacts. section 8036, none of the funds may be expended by an entity of the department unless the entity complies with the buy american act. if the secretary determines that a person has been convicted of intentionally affixing a label bearing an america inscription to any product not made in america the secretary shall determine whether the person shall be debarred from contracting. it is the sense of the congress that any entity of the department purchase only american-made equipment. section 8037, none of the funds shall be available for a contract for studies entered into without competition on the basis of an unsolicited proposal unless the head of the activity responsible for the procurement determines as a result of thorough technical evaluation only when sources found qualified for the proposed work. section 8038, none of the funds

made available shall establish a field operating agency. section 8039, the secretary through the office of economic adjustment of the department may use funds under the heading "operation and maintenance defensewide" to make grants. section 8040, funds are rescinded. none of the funds may be used for the construction of additional sea lift capacity. section 8041, none of the funds may be used to reduce the authorized positions for military technicians of the army national guard. section 8042, none of the funds may be obligated or expended to the democratic people's republic of korea. section 8043, funds appropriated for operation and maintenance of the military departments combatant commands shall be available for reimbursement of pay which would otherwise be incurred

against appropriations for the national guard and reserve. section 8044, none of the funds in this act may be used to reduce the civilian medical and medical support personnel. section 8045, none of the funds for drug interdiction or counterdrug activities may be transferred to any other department or agency. none of the funds to the central intelligence agency for drug interdiction may be transferred to any other department or agency. section 8046, none of the funds may be used for the procurement of roller barings other than those used by a domestic source. section 8047, none of the funds may be used to purchase any supercomputer which is not manufactured in the united states. section 8048, none of the funds may be used to pay the salary of any officer or employee of the department who approves or

implements the transfer of administrative responsibilities. section 8049, none of the funds available to the department may be obligated or expended to transfer to another nation. section 8050, none the funds shall be obligated to pay a contractor for costs of any amount paid by the contractor to an employee when such costs are for a bonus. section 8051, no more than $30 million may be transferred to appropriations available for the pay of military personnel to be used in support of such personnel in connection with support for eligible organizations outside the department pursuant to section 2012 of title 10, united states code. section 8052, in the case of an appropriation account for which the availability for obligation is expired and which has a

negative unliquid ated balance, an obligation may be charged to any current appropriation account for the same purpose as the expired or closed account if the obligation would have been properly chargeable. section 8053, the chief of the national guard bureau may permit the use of equipment of the national guard distance learning project by any person on a space available reimbursable basis. section 8054, the secretary of the air force may have agreements for required heating facility modernization and the kaiser spotter military community and the federal republic of germany. section 8055, none of the funds may be used to procure end items for delivery for military forces for operational training. section 8056, none of the funds may be used to approve or license the sale of the f-22-a

advanced tactical fighter to any foreign government. section 8057, the secretary may waive with respect to a foreign country each limitation on the procurement of defense items from foreign sources if the secretary determines that the application would invalidate cooperative programs. section 8058, none of the funds may be used to support any training program involving a unit of the security forces or police of a foreign country. the secretary shall ensure that full consideration is given to all credible information available. the secretary after consultation with the secretary of state may waive the prohibition not more than 15 days after the exercise of any waiver the secretary shall submit a report to the committees describing the purpose and duration of the training program. section 8059, none of the funds available may be obligated for the purpose of performing repairs or mapet assistance to

military family housing units. section 8060, funds appropriated under the heading "research, development, test and evaluation defensewide." section 8061, the secretary shall provide a quarterly report to begin 30 days after enactment of this act to the house. section 8062, none of the funds available to the defense department may be used to another department if such department is 90 days in arrears in making payments to goods and services previously provided on a reimbursable basis. section 8063, a reserve who is a member of the national guard serving on full-time national guard duty may perform duties in support of the ground-based elements of the national ballistic national missile defense system. section 8064, none of the funds may be used to transfer to any nongovernmental entity any munition department that has a

center-fired cart radge. section 8065, they may waive payment of consideration under section 2667 of title 10, united states code. section 8066, none of the funds shall be used for the support of any nonappropriated funds activity of the department that procures malt beverages. section 8067, under the heading operation and maintenance, army, $124,493,000 shall remain available until expended. section 8068, section 8106 of the department of defense appropriations act, 1997, shall continue in effect to apply disbursements that are made to the department. section 8069, $4 million is hereby appropriated to the department to remain available for obligation until expended. section 8070, under the headings procurement

defensewide and research, development, test and evaluation defensewide, $235,700,000 shall be for the israeli cooperative programs. section 8071, none of the funds may be obligated to modify command and controlled relationships to give fleet forces command administrative and operational control of u.s. navy forces assigned to the pacific fleet. section 8072, under the heading "shipbuilding and conversion: navy," 72 million shall be made available until september 30, 2012 to fund prior year shipbuilding cost increases. section 8074, funds appropriated for intelligence activities are deemed to be specifically authorized. section 8075, none of the funds shall be available for obligation or expenditure through a reprogramming of funds that creates a new program unless such program

must be undertaken in the interest of national security. section 8076, the budget of the president shall include separate budget justification documents for costs of the united states armed forces participation in contingens operations for the military person -- contingency operations for the military personnel accounts. section 8077, none of the funds will be used for research of a missile defense system. section 8078, $44 million is hereby appropriated to the department of defense. section 8079, none of the funds shall be used to reduce the operation of the 53rd weather reconnaissance squadron of the 81st reserve. section 8080, none the funds shall be available for integration of foreign intelligence information unless the information has been lawfully collected. section 8081, at the time members of reserve components

each member shall be notified in writing of the expected period during which the member will be mobilized. the secretary may waive the requirements of subsection a in which the secretary determines that it is necessary to do so to respond to a national security emergency. section 8082, the secretary may transfer from any available department of the navy appropriation to any available navy ship construction appropriation for the purpose of liquidating necessary changes. section 8083, any subdivision of appropriations made under the heading shipbuilding and conversion, navy, that does not -- is not closed at the time reimbursement is made shall be used to reimburse the judgment fund. section 8084, none the funds may be used to transfer research and development relating to current tactical unmanned aerial vehicles. section 8085, $15 million under

the heading operation and maintenance navy maybe maid available for the asia-pacific regional initiative program. section 8086, none of the funds shall remain available for obligation beyond the current fiscal year except for funds appropriated for research and technology. section 8087, any subdivision of appropriations sunday the -- under the heading ship building and conversion navy shall be considered to be for the same purpose as any subdivision under the heading ship building and conversion navy appropriations in any prior fiscal year. section 8088, not more than 35% of funds may be obligated under indefinite deliver, indefinite quantity contracts with the total contract value of $130 million. section 8089, the director of national intelligence shall include the budget exhibits in the department, financial management regulation with the congressional budget

justification books. for procurement programs requesting more than $10 million in any fiscal year. section 8090, the secretary shall create a major force program category for space for each future year's defense program. section 8091, the director of national intelligence shall submit a report to establish the baseline for application of reprogramming authorities pursuant to section 8092 of this act for fiscal year 2012. section 8092, none of the funds shall be available for only gation through reprogramming or transfer of funds in accordance with section 102-ad of the national security act of 1947. none of the funds value be -- shall be available for obligation in excess of $1 million that augments existing programs, projects or subprojects. section 8093, the director of national intelligence shall

submit to congress each year a future year's intelligence program reflecting the estimated expenditures and proposed appropriations. section 8094, the term congressional intelligence committees means the permanent select committee on the intelligence of the house, the select committee on intelligence of the senate. section 8095, the department shall continue to report incremental contingency operations, costs -- contingency operations costs. section 8096, $11 million from title 2 of this act for operation and maintenance army, operation and maintenance navy and operation and maintenance air force may be transferred to its central fund for fisher houses and suits. section 8097, funds appropriated in the intelligence community management account, $22 million is available for transfer for

government-wide information sharing activities. section 8098, funds for operation and maintenance may be available for remittences to the defense acquisition work force development fund. section 8099, any agency receiving funds shall post on the public website any report required to be submitted by congress. b, subsection a shall not apply if the public posting of the report compromises national security or contains proprietary information. section 8100, none of the funds may be expended for any federal contract in excess of $1 million unless the contractor agrees not to enter into any agreement with any of its employees or contractors, that the employee or contractor agreed to resolve through arbitration any claim.

section 8101, prohibition on -- >> madam chair. the chair: the clerk will suspend. for what purpose does the gentleman from texas rise? >> i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will report the amendment. the clerk: amendment offered by mr. sessions of texas. strike section 8101. the chair: the gentleman from texas. mr. sessions: thank you, madam chairman. this month the house has voted twice to strike problematic and anticompetitive a-76 language from h.r. 2112, the agriculture appropriations bill, and h.r. 2017, the department of homeland security appropriations bill. the same change and reversal of bad language should be adopted in legislation today by striking this anticompetitive language. my amendment would strike section 8101 of this legislation which as drafted prohibits the use of funds in the underlying bill to convert any functions performed by federal employees

to private competition pursuant to a study conducted under o.m.b. circular a-76. a-76 cost comparisons between public and private sector brings the best value to the taxpayer. lifting the current moratorium will reform the way the defense -- department -- the department of defense does business, allowing the flexibility to manage the most effective and efficient costways in supporting the mission of the department of defense. the role of government should be to govern, not to operate business inside the government. currently the federal government employees some two million executive branch nonpostal full time and permanent employees. 850,000 of these employees hold jobs that are commercial in nature. the underlying principle of a-76 is that the government should consider private sector performance of commercial services where appropriate.

this notion has been consistently embraced by administrations of both political parties for more than 60 years. over the past two years, the obama administration has pushed for an end -- an insourcing campaign within d.o.d. secretary gates put a halt on that practice recently due to what "forbes" magazine on march 7, 2011, called, and i quote, a victim of bad planning and disappointing results. end of quote. two years of shutting out private competition resulted in zero taxpayer savings. according to a small business administration study, 71% of a-76 goes to small business. this work is important and must be done well but should be done also where the taxpayer sees results and the tax benefit. any time congress places a restriction on agencies' ability to implement a-76 such action

denies opportunity for small business. our nation's unemployment rate stands at 9.1%. we must allow the private sector the ability to create jobs without an unfair disadvantage. the a-76 process allows the private sector just this opportunity. if competition is deemed fair, it doesn't matter who wins. as long as both sides are allowed equal opportunity for the job, the taxpayer ultimately wins. i urge all my colleagues to support this commonsense taxpayer first amendment and to ensure that cost saving competition is available throughout the department of defense. thank you, madam chairman, and i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman from texas yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from washington. mr. dicks: yes. i rise in opposition to the gentleman's amendment. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. dicks: an amendment may be offered to strike section 8101 from the bill. this section provides that

defense department must certify compliance with the fiscal year 2008 law which requires d.o.d. to provide an inventory of its service contracts, review those contracts and then integrate those results into the budget process before using the o.m.b. circular a-76 privatization process. so i rise in opposition to the gentleman's amendment. this provision is included in the fiscal year 2012 budget request. it requires that d.o.d. exercise responsible stewardship over its contractors by providing an inventory of such contractors, a review of associated contracts and an explanation of how these contracts are integrated into the budget. the provision requires the department of defense to maintain better accountability of the thousands of contractors performing services for the department every day. and therefore maintains better accountability of funds.

striking this section releases the department from this responsibility. and i must tell the gentleman from texas who's a good friend that we had a terrific problem getting the department of defense to even be able to tell us how many contractors they have. and we had this problem in iraq, we had this problem in afghanistan and we're still struggling. now they give us a quarterly report of how many contractors and how many contract employees there are. i have always believed in the a-76 review process and in fact i had an amendment probably 25 years ago that said, after you do a-76 if you contract out to the private computer companies, if they win the competition between the government unit and the private sector, that you have to keep analyzing what's happened to the cost. and what we found was, as soon as the thing was contracted out,

the prices started to go up. and until we had this auditing process that looked into this. and then that was taken out, i think, somewhere in the 1990's. and so we didn't have this mechanism to ensure that we were getting the best deal. and there were problems associated with pensions, could you compare government pensions with private sector pensions. a lot of this was worked out. but the idea of not being accountable, not having these companies, you know, not having the government, the defense department know how many service contractors it has and how much -- so if we're going to reduce spending we've got to know that. we've got to understand that. and i hope that we can continue to work on this problem because the idea that congress doesn't get the information that is

necessary to how many people we've contracted out to is i think ridiculous. and i think congress has to insist that we get this information. mr. sessions: will the gentleman yield? mr. dicks: of course. mr. sessions: i think the gentleman brings up pertinent questions that he has dealt with throughout his career about how do we effectively utilize taxpayer dollars but i would like to suggest to you that we're talking about commercial activities, mowing grass, painting buildings, doing lots of other things, too, but doing things thank which are very essential -- that are very essential to the upkeep and operation but within the department of defense the base commander has a good grasp on. this the people that are in the architecture group, those people that are in the operations group, they know who they're getting and they're getting regular people who can come in and do the job that they're specified and then leave. not have full time employees

that change oil, mow grass, do the painting, do all these things. and not in every location is it advantageous but some it is. and we're talking about where they can use it to their advantage. that's where this would be utilized and so i'd like to spend a little time with you, but where it's aning an advantage for the department, we're giving them -- where it's an advantage for the department, we're giving them the opportunity. that's what this is about. mr. dicks: i think the a-76 process has been a worthy one. sometimes the contractor wins, and sometimes the unit of government reorganizes itself and they compete and it comes out that the government wins. so i think the a-76 process has worked and i hate to see us get rid of that. now, the other thing is i think the department has to do a better job of accountability, of being able to report how many civilian employees, how many military employees, how many contractors. i ask unanimous consent, i have

one additional minute. the chair: without objection. mr. dicks: and that's what i'm trying to get to. i think the idea that they can submit their budget but not be able to tell us how many contractors there are or how many -- mr. sessions: will the gentleman yield? mr. dicks: is just ridiculous. yes, i yield. mr. sessions: if you want to get your grass mowed as a big base where you've got a lot going on, do you care how many employees or just that you have the guy that's supposed to cut grass, you hold him accountable, even if he has 80 people working for him? that's the point we're trying to make. you don't have to know how many employees, you have to know that it got done at the right price. we're not doing away with the a-76 process. your points are well made. the gentleman is dead on and i appreciate you yielding. mr. dicks: i agree with the gentleman. if we can get a better deal, let's get a better deal. and i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from new york, for what purpose does he rise? >> i move to strike the last